Companies:
10,652
total market cap:
A$200.464 T
Sign In
๐บ๐ธ
EN
English
$ AUD
$
USD
๐บ๐ธ
โฌ
EUR
๐ช๐บ
โน
INR
๐ฎ๐ณ
ยฃ
GBP
๐ฌ๐ง
$
CAD
๐จ๐ฆ
$
NZD
๐ณ๐ฟ
$
HKD
๐ญ๐ฐ
$
SGD
๐ธ๐ฌ
Global ranking
Ranking by countries
America
๐บ๐ธ United States
๐จ๐ฆ Canada
๐ฒ๐ฝ Mexico
๐ง๐ท Brazil
๐จ๐ฑ Chile
Europe
๐ช๐บ European Union
๐ฉ๐ช Germany
๐ฌ๐ง United Kingdom
๐ซ๐ท France
๐ช๐ธ Spain
๐ณ๐ฑ Netherlands
๐ธ๐ช Sweden
๐ฎ๐น Italy
๐จ๐ญ Switzerland
๐ต๐ฑ Poland
๐ซ๐ฎ Finland
Asia
๐จ๐ณ China
๐ฏ๐ต Japan
๐ฐ๐ท South Korea
๐ญ๐ฐ Hong Kong
๐ธ๐ฌ Singapore
๐ฎ๐ฉ Indonesia
๐ฎ๐ณ India
๐ฒ๐พ Malaysia
๐น๐ผ Taiwan
๐น๐ญ Thailand
๐ป๐ณ Vietnam
Others
๐ฆ๐บ Australia
๐ณ๐ฟ New Zealand
๐ฎ๐ฑ Israel
๐ธ๐ฆ Saudi Arabia
๐น๐ท Turkey
๐ท๐บ Russia
๐ฟ๐ฆ South Africa
>> All Countries
Ranking by categories
๐ All assets by Market Cap
๐ Automakers
โ๏ธ Airlines
๐ซ Airports
โ๏ธ Aircraft manufacturers
๐ฆ Banks
๐จ Hotels
๐ Pharmaceuticals
๐ E-Commerce
โ๏ธ Healthcare
๐ฆ Courier services
๐ฐ Media/Press
๐ท Alcoholic beverages
๐ฅค Beverages
๐ Clothing
โ๏ธ Mining
๐ Railways
๐ฆ Insurance
๐ Real estate
โ Ports
๐ผ Professional services
๐ด Food
๐ Restaurant chains
โ๐ป Software
๐ Semiconductors
๐ฌ Tobacco
๐ณ Financial services
๐ข Oil&Gas
๐ Electricity
๐งช Chemicals
๐ฐ Investment
๐ก Telecommunication
๐๏ธ Retail
๐ฅ๏ธ Internet
๐ Construction
๐ฎ Video Game
๐ป Tech
๐ฆพ AI
>> All Categories
ETFs
๐ All ETFs
๐๏ธ Bond ETFs
๏ผ Dividend ETFs
โฟ Bitcoin ETFs
โข Ethereum ETFs
๐ช Crypto Currency ETFs
๐ฅ Gold ETFs & ETCs
๐ฅ Silver ETFs & ETCs
๐ข๏ธ Oil ETFs & ETCs
๐ฝ Commodities ETFs & ETNs
๐ Emerging Markets ETFs
๐ Small-Cap ETFs
๐ Low volatility ETFs
๐ Inverse/Bear ETFs
โฌ๏ธ Leveraged ETFs
๐ Global/World ETFs
๐บ๐ธ USA ETFs
๐บ๐ธ S&P 500 ETFs
๐บ๐ธ Dow Jones ETFs
๐ช๐บ Europe ETFs
๐จ๐ณ China ETFs
๐ฏ๐ต Japan ETFs
๐ฎ๐ณ India ETFs
๐ฌ๐ง UK ETFs
๐ฉ๐ช Germany ETFs
๐ซ๐ท France ETFs
โ๏ธ Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Gold Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Silver Mining ETFs
๐งฌ Biotech ETFs
๐ฉโ๐ป Tech ETFs
๐ Real Estate ETFs
โ๏ธ Healthcare ETFs
โก Energy ETFs
๐ Renewable Energy ETFs
๐ก๏ธ Insurance ETFs
๐ฐ Water ETFs
๐ด Food & Beverage ETFs
๐ฑ Socially Responsible ETFs
๐ฃ๏ธ Infrastructure ETFs
๐ก Innovation ETFs
๐ Semiconductors ETFs
๐ Aerospace & Defense ETFs
๐ Cybersecurity ETFs
๐ฆพ Artificial Intelligence ETFs
Watchlist
Account
Ventas
VTR
#663
Rank
A$52.50 B
Marketcap
๐บ๐ธ
United States
Country
A$111.77
Share price
1.04%
Change (1 day)
13.56%
Change (1 year)
๐ Real estate
Categories
Ventas, Inc.
is a real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership and management of health care facilities in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom.
Market cap
Revenue
Earnings
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
Annual Reports (10-K)
More
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
P/B ratio
Operating margin
EPS
Stock Splits
Dividends
Dividend yield
Shares outstanding
Fails to deliver
Cost to borrow
Total assets
Total liabilities
Total debt
Cash on Hand
Net Assets
Ventas
Annual Reports (10-K)
Financial Year 2015
Ventas - 10-K annual report 2015
Text size:
Small
Medium
Large
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015
OR
¨
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 1-10989
VENTAS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
61-1055020
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)
353 N. Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
60654
(Zip Code)
(877) 483-6827
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, par value $0.25 per share
New York Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes
¨
No
x
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment of this Form 10-K.
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer
x
Accelerated filer
¨
Non-accelerated filer
¨
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting company
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes
¨
No
x
The aggregate market value of shares of the Registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant on June 30, 2015, based on a closing price of the common stock of
$62.09
as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, was
$20.4 billion
. For purposes of the foregoing calculation only, all directors, executive officers and
10%
beneficial owners of the Registrant have been deemed affiliates.
As of
February 10, 2016
,
336,070,352
shares of the Registrant’s common stock were outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 10, 2016 are incorporated by reference into Part III, Items 10 through 14 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS
Unless otherwise indicated or except where the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” and other similar terms in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer to Ventas, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.
Forward-Looking Statements
This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). All statements regarding our or our tenants’, operators’, borrowers’ or managers’ expected future financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, funds from operations, dividends and dividend plans, financing opportunities and plans, capital markets transactions, business strategy, budgets, projected costs, operating metrics, capital expenditures, competitive positions, acquisitions, investment opportunities, dispositions, merger integration, growth opportunities, expected lease income, continued qualification as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”), plans and objectives of management for future operations, and statements that include words such as “anticipate,” “if,” “believe,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “could,” “should,” “will,” and other similar expressions are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain, and actual results may differ from our expectations. We do not undertake a duty to update these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date on which they are made.
Our actual future results and trends may differ materially from expectations depending on a variety of factors discussed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). These factors include without limitation:
•
The ability and willingness of our tenants, operators, borrowers, managers and other third parties to satisfy their obligations under their respective contractual arrangements with us, including, in some cases, their obligations to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation and liabilities;
•
The ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to maintain the financial strength and liquidity necessary to satisfy their respective obligations and liabilities to third parties, including without limitation obligations under their existing credit facilities and other indebtedness;
•
Our success in implementing our business strategy and our ability to identify, underwrite, finance, consummate and integrate diversifying acquisitions and investments;
•
Macroeconomic conditions such as a disruption of or lack of access to the capital markets, changes in the debt rating on U.S. government securities, default or delay in payment by the United States of its obligations, and changes in the federal or state budgets resulting in the reduction or nonpayment of Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement rates;
•
The nature and extent of future competition, including new construction in the markets in which our seniors housing communities and medical office buildings (“MOBs”) are located;
•
The extent of future or pending healthcare reform and regulation, including cost containment measures and changes in reimbursement policies, procedures and rates;
•
Increases in our borrowing costs as a result of changes in interest rates and other factors;
•
The ability of our tenants, operators and managers, as applicable, to comply with laws, rules and regulations in the operation of our properties, to deliver high-quality services, to attract and retain qualified personnel and to attract residents and patients;
•
Changes in general economic conditions or economic conditions in the markets in which we may, from time to time, compete, and the effect of those changes on our revenues, earnings and funding sources;
•
Our ability to pay down, refinance, restructure or extend our indebtedness as it becomes due;
•
Our ability and willingness to maintain our qualification as a REIT in light of economic, market, legal, tax and other considerations;
•
Final determination of our taxable net income for the year ended
December 31, 2015
and for the year ending December 31,
2016
;
•
The ability and willingness of our tenants to renew their leases with us upon expiration of the leases, our ability to reposition our properties on the same or better terms in the event of nonrenewal or in the event we exercise our right to replace an existing tenant, and obligations, including indemnification obligations, we may incur in connection with the replacement of an existing tenant;
i
•
Risks associated with our senior living operating portfolio, such as factors that can cause volatility in our operating income and earnings generated by those properties, including without limitation national and regional economic conditions, development of new, competing properties, costs of food, materials, energy, labor and services, employee benefit costs, insurance costs and professional and general liability claims, and the timely delivery of accurate property-level financial results for those properties;
•
Changes in exchange rates for any foreign currency in which we may, from time to time, conduct business;
•
Year-over-year changes in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) or the UK Retail Price Index and the effect of those changes on the rent escalators contained in our leases and on our earnings;
•
Our ability and the ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to obtain and maintain adequate property, liability and other insurance from reputable, financially stable providers;
•
The impact of increased operating costs and uninsured professional liability claims on our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations or that of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers and our ability and the ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to accurately estimate the magnitude of those claims;
•
Risks associated with our MOB portfolio and operations, including our ability to successfully design, develop and manage MOBs and to retain key personnel;
•
The ability of the hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their affiliated health systems to remain competitive and financially viable and to attract physicians and physician groups;
•
Risks associated with our investments in joint ventures and unconsolidated entities, including our lack of sole decision-making authority and our reliance on our joint venture partners’ financial condition;
•
The impact of market or issuer events on the liquidity or value of our investments in marketable securities;
•
Consolidation in the seniors housing and healthcare industries resulting in a change of control of, or a competitor’s investment in, one or more of our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers or significant changes in the senior management of our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers;
•
The impact of litigation or any financial, accounting, legal or regulatory issues that may affect us or our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers; and
•
Changes in accounting principles, or their application or interpretation, and our ability to make estimates and the assumptions underlying the estimates, which could have an effect on our earnings.
Many of these factors, some of which are described in greater detail under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, are beyond our control and the control of our management.
Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred, Atria, Sunrise and Ardent Information
Each of Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) is subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC and is required to file with the SEC annual reports containing audited financial information and quarterly reports containing unaudited financial information. The information related to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from SEC filings made by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, as the case may be, or other publicly available information or was provided to us by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy. We are providing this data for informational purposes only, and you are encouraged to obtain Brookdale Senior Living’s and Kindred’s publicly available filings, which can be found on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”), Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”) and Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) are not currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria, Sunrise and Ardent contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from publicly available information or was provided to us by Atria, Sunrise or Ardent, as the case may be, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Item 1.
Business
1
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
22
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
37
Item 2.
Properties
37
Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
39
Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
39
PART II
Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
39
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
42
Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
43
Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
76
Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
77
Item 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
184
Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
185
Item 9B.
Other Information
185
PART III
Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
185
Item 11.
Executive Compensation
185
Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
185
Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
185
Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
186
PART IV
Item 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
187
iii
PART I
ITEM 1.
Business
BUSINESS
Overview
Ventas, Inc., an S&P 500 company, is a REIT with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned approximately
1,300
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, MOBs, skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals, and we had
four
properties under development. Our company was originally founded in 1983 and is currently headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased a total of
607
properties (excluding MOBs and properties classified as held for sale) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and we engaged independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage a total of
304
of our seniors housing communities (excluding properties classified as held for sale) for us pursuant to long-term management agreements. Our three largest tenants, Brookdale, Kindred and Ardent leased from us
140
properties (excluding
six
properties included in investments in unconsolidated real estate entities),
76
properties and
ten
properties, respectively, as of
December 31, 2015
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Lillibridge”) subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC (“PMBRES”), we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
We operate through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and MOB operations. See our Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes, including “Note 2—Accounting Policies,” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Business Strategy
We aim to enhance shareholder value by delivering consistent, superior total returns through a strategy of: (1) generating reliable and growing cash flows; (2) maintaining a balanced, diversified portfolio of high-quality assets; and (3) preserving our financial strength, flexibility and liquidity.
Generating Reliable and Growing Cash Flows
Generating reliable and growing cash flows from our seniors housing and healthcare assets enables us to pay regular cash dividends to stockholders and creates opportunities to increase shareholder value through profitable investments. The combination of steady contractual growth from our long-term triple-net leases, steady, reliable cash flows from our loan investments and stable cash flows from our MOBs with the higher growth potential inherent in our seniors housing operating communities drives our ability to generate sustainable, growing cash flows that are resilient to economic downturns.
Maintaining a Balanced, Diversified Portfolio
We believe that maintaining a balanced portfolio of high-quality assets diversified by investment type, geographic location, asset type, tenant/operator, revenue source and operating model diminishes the risk that any single factor or event could materially harm our business. Portfolio diversification also enhances the reliability of our cash flows by reducing our exposure to any individual tenant, operator or manager and making us less susceptible to single-state regulatory or reimbursement changes, regional climate events and local economic downturns.
Preserving Our Financial Strength, Flexibility and Liquidity
A strong, flexible balance sheet and excellent liquidity position us favorably to capitalize on strategic growth opportunities in the seniors housing and healthcare industries through acquisitions, investments, and development and redevelopment projects. We maintain our financial strength to pursue profitable investment opportunities by actively managing our leverage, improving our cost of capital and preserving our access to multiple sources of liquidity, including unsecured bank debt, mortgage financings and public debt and equity markets.
1
2015
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
Investments and Dispositions
•
In January 2015, we acquired American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction, which added
152
properties to our portfolio, 20 of which were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately 28.4 million shares of our common stock at
$78.00
per share and
1.1 million
limited partnership units.
•
On August 4, 2015, we completed our acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. (“AHS”) and simultaneous separation and sale of the Ardent hospital operating company (Ardent Health Partners, LLC, together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) to a consortium composed of an entity controlled by Equity Group Investments, Ardent’s management team and us. As of the acquisition date, we recorded the estimated fair value of our investment in owned hospital and other real estate of approximately
$1.3 billion.
At closing, we paid
$26.3 million
for our
9.9%
interest in Ardent, which represents our estimate of the acquisition date fair value of this interest. Upon closing, we entered into a long-term triple-net master lease with Ardent to operate hospitals and other real estate we acquired.
•
During 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately
$611.7 million
, including the acquisition of eleven triple-net leased properties;
eleven
MOBs; and
12
skilled nursing facilities (all of which were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off (as defined below)).
•
During 2015, we sold
39
triple-net leased properties and
26
MOBs for aggregate consideration of
$541.0 million
, including a
$6.0 million
lease termination fee.
•
During 2015, we received aggregate proceeds of
$173.8 million
in final repayment of loans receivable and sales of bonds we held, and recognized gains aggregating
$7.7 million
.
Capital and Dividends
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold 3,750,202 shares of common stock under our previous “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $285.4 million, after sales agent commissions of $4.4 million. Through the remainder of 2015 and in the first quarter of 2016 we have issued and sold a total of 5,084,302 shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $297.0 million, after sales agent commissions of $4.5 million.
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold
$1.1 billion
of senior notes with a weighted average interest rate below
3.7%
and a weighted average maturity of
15
years. The issuances were composed of
$900 million
aggregate principal amount of USD senior notes and CAD notes of
250 million
.
•
In July 2015, we issued and sold
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.218%
of par, for total proceeds of
$496.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
•
In August 2015, we completed a
$900 million
five
year term loan having a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus
1.0
basis points (the “Ardent Term Loan”). The term loan matures in 2020.
•
In 2015, we repaid
$305.0 million
of our unsecured term loan due 2019 and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.6 million
representing a write-off of the then unamortized deferred financing fees. Also, in May 2015, we repaid in full, at par,
$234.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
6%
senior notes due 2015.
•
In 2015, we paid an annual cash dividend on our common stock of
$3.04
per share. On August 17, 2015, we also distributed a stock dividend of one Care Capital Properties, Inc. (“CCP”) common share for every four shares of Ventas common stock held as of the distribution record date of August 10, 2015. The stock dividend was valued at $8.51 per Ventas share based on the opening price of CCP stock on its first day of regular-way trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
•
In February 2016, we entered into a $200 million notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at 1.132% through the maturity date of the swap. The maturity date of the Ardent Term Loan is also August 3, 2020.
2
Spin-Off
•
In August 2015, we completed the spin off of most of our post-acute/skilled nursing facility portfolio into an independent, publicly traded REIT named Care Capital Properties, Inc. (the “CCP Spin-Off”). The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities are presented as discontinued operations for all periods presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Portfolio Summary
The following table summarizes our consolidated portfolio of properties and other investments (excluding properties included in discontinued operations during
2015
and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
) as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2015
:
Real Estate Property Investments
Revenues (3)
Asset Type
# of
Properties(1)
# of
Units/
Sq. Ft./Beds
(2)
Real Estate Property Investment, at Cost
Percent of
Total Real Estate Property Investments
Real Estate
Property
Investment Per Unit/Bed/Sq. Ft.
Revenue
Percent of Total Revenues
(Dollars in thousands)
Seniors housing communities
768
66,985
$
16,105,062
65.3
%
$
240.4
$2,289,653
69.7
%
MOBs (4)
361
20,062,590
5,361,330
21.7
0.3
591,646
18.0
Skilled nursing facilities
53
6,279
358,329
1.5
57.1
72,820
2.2
Specialty hospitals
46
3,857
524,084
2.1
135.9
143,776
4.4
General acute care hospitals
12
2,034
1,453,649
5.9
714.7
59,229
1.8
Total properties
1,240
23,802,454
96.5
3,157,124
96.1
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
857,112
3.5
86,553
2.6
Interest and other income
—
—
1,052
0.0
Revenues related to assets classified as held for sale
—
—
41,669
1.3
Total
$
24,659,566
100.0
%
$
3,286,398
100.0
%
(1)
As of
December 31, 2015
, we also owned
20
seniors housing communities,
14
skilled nursing facilities and
seven
MOBs through investments in unconsolidated entities, and we classified
one
seniors housing community,
two
skilled nursing facilities, and
eight
MOBs as held for sale. Our consolidated properties were located in
46
states, the District of Columbia,
seven
Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom and, excluding MOBs, were operated or managed by
68
unaffiliated healthcare operating companies, including the following publicly traded companies or their subsidiaries: Brookdale (141 properties) (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities); Kindred (
76
properties); 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. (
12
properties); Capital Senior Living Corporation (
12
properties); Spire Healthcare plc (
three
properties); and HealthSouth Corp. (
four
properties).
(2)
Seniors housing communities are measured in units; MOBs are measured by square footage; and skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals are measured by bed count.
(3)
Total revenues exclude revenues attributable to properties included in discontinued operations during
2015
.
(4)
As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased
67
of our consolidated MOBs pursuant to triple-net leases, Lillibridge or PMBRES managed
282
of our consolidated MOBs and
30
of our consolidated MOBs were managed by
eleven
unaffiliated managers. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we also provided management and leasing services for
79
MOBs owned by third parties as of
December 31, 2015
.
Seniors Housing and Healthcare Properties
As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned a total of
1,281
seniors housing and healthcare properties (excluding properties classified as held for sale), including through our investments in unconsolidated entities, as follows:
Consolidated
(100% interest)
Consolidated
(<100% interest)
Unconsolidated
(5-25% interest)
Total
Seniors housing communities
753
15
20
788
MOBs
327
34
7
368
Skilled nursing facilities
53
—
14
67
Specialty hospitals
45
1
—
46
General acute care hospitals
12
—
—
12
Total
1,190
50
41
1,281
3
Seniors Housing Communities
Our seniors housing communities include independent and assisted living communities, continuing care retirement communities and communities providing care for individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia or memory loss. These communities offer studio, one bedroom and two bedroom residential units on a month-to-month basis primarily to elderly individuals requiring various levels of assistance. Basic services for residents of these communities include housekeeping, meals in a central dining area and group activities organized by the staff with input from the residents. More extensive care and personal supervision, at additional fees, are also available for such needs as eating, bathing, grooming, transportation, limited therapeutic programs and medication administration, which allow residents certain conveniences and enable them to live as independently as possible according to their abilities. These services are often met by home health providers, close coordination with the resident’s physician and skilled nursing facilities. Charges for room, board and services are generally paid from private sources.
Medical Office Buildings
Typically, our MOBs are multi-tenant properties leased to several unrelated medical practices, although in many cases they may be associated with a large single specialty or multi-specialty group. Tenants include physicians, dentists, psychologists, therapists and other healthcare providers, who require space devoted to patient examination and treatment, diagnostic imaging, outpatient surgery and other outpatient services. MOBs are similar to commercial office buildings, although they require greater plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems to accommodate physicians’ requirements such as sinks in every room, brighter lights and specialized medical equipment. As of December 31, 2015, we owned or managed for third parties approximately 24 million square feet of MOBs that are predominantly located on or near an acute care hospital campus (“on campus”).
Skilled Nursing Facilities
Our skilled nursing facilities provide rehabilitative, restorative, skilled nursing and medical treatment for patients and residents who do not require the high technology, care-intensive, high cost setting of an acute care or rehabilitation hospital. Treatment programs include physical, occupational, speech, respiratory and other therapies, including sub-acute clinical protocols such as wound care and intravenous drug treatment. Charges for these services are generally paid from a combination of government reimbursement and private sources.
Long-Term Acute Care Hospitals
38 of our properties are operated as long-term acute care hospitals (“LTACs”). LTACs have a Medicare average length of stay of greater than 25 days and serve medically complex, chronically ill patients who require a high level of monitoring and specialized care, but whose conditions do not necessitate the continued services of an intensive care unit. The operators of these LTACs have the capability to treat patients who suffer from multiple systemic failures or conditions such as neurological disorders, head injuries, brain stem and spinal cord trauma, cerebral vascular accidents, chemical brain injuries, central nervous system disorders, developmental anomalies and cardiopulmonary disorders. Chronic patients often depend on technology for continued life support, such as mechanical ventilators, total parenteral nutrition, respiration or cardiac monitors and dialysis machines, and, due to their severe medical conditions, generally are not clinically appropriate for admission to a nursing facility or rehabilitation hospital. All of our LTACs are freestanding facilities, and we do not own any “hospitals within hospitals.” We also own two LTACs focused on providing children’s care and five rehabilitation LTACs devoted to the rehabilitation of patients with various neurological, musculoskeletal, orthopedic and other medical conditions following stabilization of their acute medical issues.
General Acute Care Hospitals
12 of our properties are operated as general acute care hospitals. General acute care hospitals provide medical and surgical services, including inpatient care, intensive care, cardiac care, diagnostic services and emergency services. These hospitals also provide outpatient services such as outpatient surgery, laboratory, radiology, respiratory therapy, cardiology and physical therapy. In the United States, these hospitals receive payments for patient services from the federal government primarily under the Medicare program, state governments under their respective Medicaid or similar programs, health maintenance organizations, preferred provider organizations, other private insurers, and directly from patients.
Geographic Diversification of Properties
Our portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties is broadly diversified by geographic location throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, with properties in only
one
state (
California
) accounting for more than 10% of our total revenues and total net operating income (“NOI,” which is defined as total revenues, excluding interest and other
4
income, less property-level operating expenses and medical office building services costs), in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations, for the year ended
December 31, 2015
.
The following table shows our rental income and resident fees and services by geographic location for the year ended
December 31, 2015
:
Rental Income and
Resident Fees and
Services (1)
Percent of Total
Revenues (1)
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
505,702
15.4
%
New York
289,081
8.8
Texas
199,428
6.1
Illinois
160,468
4.9
Florida
150,572
4.6
Pennsylvania
118,226
3.6
Georgia
114,857
3.5
Arizona
98,296
3.0
New Jersey
93,608
2.9
Colorado
89,228
2.7
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
1,137,927
34.5
Total U.S
2,957,393
90.0
%
Canada (7 provinces)
173,737
5.3
United Kingdom
26,171
0.8
Total
$
3,157,301
96.1
%
(2)
(1)
This presentation excludes revenues from properties included in discontinued operations during
2015
.
(2)
The remainder of our total revenues is medical office building and other services revenue, income from loans and investments and interest and other income.
5
The following table shows our NOI by geographic location for the year ended
December 31, 2015
:
NOI (1)
Percent of Total
NOI (1)
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
276,044
14.7
%
Texas
126,217
6.7
New York
112,966
6.0
Illinois
103,599
5.5
Florida
90,131
4.8
Pennsylvania
61,072
3.3
Arizona
54,441
2.9
North Carolina
52,217
2.8
Indiana
51,100
2.7
Wisconsin
50,917
2.7
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
786,695
41.9
Total U.S
1,765,399
94.0
%
Canada (7 provinces)
83,571
4.5
United Kingdom
26,171
1.4
Total
$
1,875,141
99.9
%
(1)
This presentation excludes NOI from properties included in discontinued operations during
2015
.
See “Note 20—Segment Information” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information regarding the geographic diversification of our portfolio.
Certificates of Need
Our skilled nursing facilities and hospitals are generally subject to federal, state and local licensure statutes and statutes that may require regulatory approval, in the form of a certificate of need (“CON”) issued by a governmental agency with jurisdiction over healthcare facilities, prior to the expansion of existing facilities, construction of new facilities, addition of beds, acquisition of major equipment or introduction of new services. CON requirements, which are not uniform throughout the United States, may restrict our or our operators’ ability to expand our properties in certain circumstances.
The following table shows the percentages of our rental income (excluding amounts in discontinued operations) for the year ended
December 31, 2015
that are derived by skilled nursing facilities and hospitals in states with and without CON requirements:
Skilled
Nursing
Facilities
Hospitals
Total
States with CON requirements
57.5
%
144.4
%
96.5
%
States without CON requirements
42.5
(44.4
)
3.5
Total
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Loans and Investments
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$895.0 million
of net loans receivable and investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties. Our loans receivable and investments provide us with interest income, principal amortization and transaction fees and are typically secured by mortgage liens or leasehold mortgages on the underlying properties and corporate or personal guarantees by affiliates of the borrowing entity. In some cases, the loans are secured by a pledge of ownership interests in the entity or entities that own the related seniors housing or healthcare properties. From time to time, we also make investments in mezzanine loans, which are subordinated to senior secured loans held by other investors that
6
encumber the same real estate. See “Note 6—Loans Receivable and Investments” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Development and Redevelopment Projects
We are party to certain agreements that obligate us to develop seniors housing or healthcare properties funded through capital that we and, in certain circumstances, our joint venture partners provide. As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
four
properties under development pursuant to these agreements. In addition, from time to time, we engage in redevelopment projects with respect to our existing seniors housing communities to maximize the value, increase NOI, maintain a market-competitive position, achieve property stabilization or change the primary use of the property.
Segment Information
We evaluate our operating performance and allocate resources based on three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties; senior living operations; and MOB operations. Non-segment assets, classified as “all other,” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, deferred financing costs, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable. For further information regarding our business segments, see “Note 20—Segment Information” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Significant Tenants, Operators and Managers
The following table summarizes certain information regarding our tenant, operator and manager concentration as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2015
(excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
and properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities):
Number of
Properties
Leased or
Managed
Percent of Total Real Estate Investments (1)
Percent of Total Revenues
Percent of NOI
Senior living operations
304
34.4
%
55.1
%
32.1
%
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
140
8.5
5.3
9.3
Kindred
76
2.1
5.6
9.8
Ardent
10
5.3
1.3
2.3
(1)
Based on gross book value.
(2)
Excludes
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement.
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Each of our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent is a triple-net lease that obligates the tenant to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and to comply with the terms of the mortgage financing documents, if any, affecting the properties. In addition, each of our Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent leases has a corporate guaranty. Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred have multiple leases with us and those leases contain cross-default provisions tied to each other, as well as bundled lease renewals (as described in more detail below).
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the year ended
December 31, 2015
. If any of Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be impaired. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or liquidity and our ability to service our indebtedness and other obligations and to make distributions to our stockholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT (a “Material Adverse Effect”). We also cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will elect to renew their respective leases with us upon expiration of the leases or that we will be able to reposition any non-renewed properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all. See “Risks Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—Our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent account for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and operating income; Any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent
7
to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Brookdale Senior Living Leases
As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased
140
properties (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement) to Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to multiple lease agreements.
Pursuant to our lease agreements, Brookdale Senior Living is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually at a specified rate over the prior period base rent. As of
December 31, 2015
, the aggregate
2016
contractual cash rent due to us from Brookdale Senior Living, excluding variable interest that Brookdale Senior Living is obligated to pay as additional rent based on certain floating rate mortgage debt, was approximately
$170.9 million
, and the current aggregate contractual base rent (computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”)) due to us from Brookdale Senior Living, excluding the variable interest, was approximately
$160.6 million
(in each case, excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities as of
December 31, 2015
). See “Note 3—Concentration of Credit Risk” and “Note 14—Commitments and Contingencies” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Kindred Leases
As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased
76
properties to Kindred pursuant to multiple lease agreements. The properties leased pursuant to our Kindred master leases are grouped into bundles, or “renewal groups,” with each renewal group containing a varying number of geographically diversified properties. All properties within a single renewal group have the same current lease term of five to 12 years, and each renewal group is currently subject to one or more successive five-year renewal terms at Kindred’s option, provided certain conditions are satisfied. Kindred’s renewal option is “all or nothing” with respect to the properties contained in each renewal group.
The aggregate annual rent we receive under each Kindred master lease is referred to as “base rent.” Base rent escalates annually at a specified rate over the prior period base rent, contingent, in the case of the remaining three original Kindred master leases, upon the satisfaction of specified facility revenue parameters. The annual rent escalator under two Kindred master leases is 2.7%, and the annual rent escalator under the other two Kindred master leases is based on year-over-year changes in CPI, subject to floors and caps.
In December 2014, we entered into favorable agreements with Kindred to transition or sell the operations of
nine
licensed healthcare assets, make modifications to the master leases governing
34
leased assets, and reimburse us for certain deferred capital expenditures at skilled nursing facilities previously transferred to new operators. In January 2015, Kindred paid us
$37 million
in connection with these agreements, which is being amortized over the remaining lease term for the
34
assets governed by the modified master leases. We own or have the rights to all licenses and CONs at the
nine
properties to be transitioned or sold, and Kindred has extensive and detailed obligations to cooperate and ensure an orderly transition of the properties to another operator. As of
December 31, 2015
,
four
of the
nine
properties have been sold and
three
of the
nine
properties were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
Ardent Lease
As of December 31, 2015, we leased ten hospital campuses to Ardent pursuant to a single, triple-net master lease agreement. Pursuant to our master lease agreement, Ardent is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually by the lesser of four times the increase in the consumer price index for the relevant period and 2.5%. The initial term of the master lease expires on August 31, 2035 and Ardent has one ten-year renewal option.
As of December 31, 2015, the aggregate 2016 contractual cash rent due to us from Ardent, was approximately $105.0 million, and the current aggregate contractual base rent (computed in accordance with GAAP) due to us from Ardent was approximately $105.0 million.
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2015
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
268
seniors housing communities included in our senior living operations reportable business segment, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements. Most of our management agreements with Atria have initial terms expiring either July 31, 2024 or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic ten-year renewal periods. The management fees payable to Atria under most of the Atria management agreements range from 4.5% to 5% of revenues generated by the applicable properties, and Atria can earn up to an additional 1% of revenues based on the achievement of specified performance targets. Most of our management agreements with Sunrise have terms ranging from 25
8
to 30 years (which commenced as early as 2004 and as recently as 2012). The management fees payable to Sunrise under the Sunrise management agreements range from 5% to 7% of revenues generated by the applicable properties. See “Note 3—Concentration of Credit Risk” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, we rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on our managers to set appropriate resident fees and to otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under those agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership or any adverse developments in their businesses and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; Adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” and “—We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our 34% ownership interest in Atria entitles us to certain rights and minority protections, as well as the right to appoint two of five members on the Atria board of directors.
Competition
We generally compete for investments in seniors housing and healthcare assets with publicly traded, private and non-listed healthcare REITs, real estate partnerships, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders and other investors, including developers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, government-sponsored entities and private equity firms, some of whom may have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we do. Increased competition challenges our ability to identify and successfully capitalize on opportunities that meet our objectives, which is affected by, among other factors, the availability of suitable acquisition or investment targets, our ability to negotiate acceptable transaction terms and our access to and cost of capital. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—Our pursuit of investments in and acquisitions of, or our development or redevelopment of, seniors housing and healthcare assets may be unsuccessful or fail to meet our expectations” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and “Note 10—Borrowing Arrangements” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our tenants, operators and managers also compete on a local and regional basis with other healthcare operating companies that provide comparable services. Seniors housing community, skilled nursing facility and hospital operators compete to attract and retain residents and patients to our properties based on scope and quality of care, reputation and financial condition, price, location and physical appearance of the properties, services offered, qualified personnel, physician referrals and family preferences. With respect to MOBs, we and our third-party managers compete to attract and retain tenants based on many of the same factors, in addition to quality of the affiliated health system, physician preferences and proximity to hospital campuses. The ability of our tenants, operators and managers to compete successfully could be affected by private, federal and state reimbursement programs and other laws and regulations. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—Our tenants, operators and managers may be adversely affected by healthcare regulation and enforcement” and “—Changes in the reimbursement rates or methods of payment from third-party payors, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs, could have a material adverse effect on certain of our tenants and operators and on us” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Employees
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
466
employees, including
258
employees associated with our MOB operations reportable business segment, but excluding
1,319
employees at our Canadian seniors housing communities under the supervision and control of our independent managers. Although the applicable manager is responsible for hiring and maintaining the labor force at each of our Canadian seniors housing communities, we bear many of the costs and risks generally borne by employers, particularly with respect to those properties with unionized labor. None of our employees is subject to a collective bargaining agreement, other than those employees in the Canadian seniors housing communities managed by Sunrise or Atria. We believe that relations with our employees are positive. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
9
Our operating assets expose us to various operational risks, liabilities and claims that could adversely affect our ability to generate revenues or increase our costs and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Insurance
We maintain or require in our lease, management and other agreements that our tenants, operators and managers maintain all applicable lines of insurance on our properties and their operations. We believe that the amount and scope of insurance coverage provided by our policies and the policies required to be maintained by our tenants, operators and managers are customary for similarly situated companies in our industry. Although we regularly monitor our tenants’, operators’ and managers’ compliance with their respective insurance requirements, we cannot assure you that they will maintain the required insurance coverages, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by our tenants, operators and managers to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. We also cannot assure you that we will continue to require the same levels of insurance coverage under our lease, management and other agreements, that such insurance coverage will be available at a reasonable cost in the future or that the policies maintained will fully cover all losses related to our properties upon the occurrence of a catastrophic event, nor can we assure you of the future financial viability of the insurers.
We maintain the property insurance for all of our senior living operations, as well as the general and professional liability insurance for our seniors housing communities and related operations managed by Atria. However, Sunrise maintains the general and professional liability insurance for our seniors housing communities and related operations that it manages in accordance with the terms of our management agreements. Under our management agreements with Sunrise, we may elect, on an annual basis, whether we or Sunrise will bear responsibility for maintaining the required insurance coverage for the applicable properties, but the costs of such insurance are facility expenses paid from the revenues of those properties, regardless of who maintains the insurance.
Through our MOB operations, we provide engineering, construction and architectural services in connection with new development projects, and any design, construction or systems failures related to the properties we develop could result in substantial injury or damage to our clients or third parties. Any such injury or damage claims may arise in the ordinary course and may be asserted with respect to ongoing or completed projects. Although we maintain liability insurance to protect us against these claims, if any claim results in a loss, we cannot assure you that our policy limits would be adequate to cover the loss in full. If we sustain losses in excess of our insurance coverage, we may be required to pay the difference and we could lose our investment in, or experience reduced profits and cash flows from, the affected MOB, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
For various reasons, including to reduce and manage costs, many healthcare companies utilize different organizational and corporate structures coupled with self-insurance trusts or captive programs that may provide less coverage than a traditional insurance policy. As a result, companies that self-insure could incur large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations. The implementation of a trust or captive by any of our tenants, operators or managers could adversely affect such person’s ability to satisfy its obligations under, or otherwise comply with the terms of, its respective lease, management and other agreements with us, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Likewise, if we decide to implement a captive or self-insurance program, any large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses that we incur could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Additional Information
We maintain a website at www.ventasreit.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and our web address is included as an inactive textual reference only.
We make available, free of charge, through our website our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. In addition, our Guidelines on Governance, our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct (including waivers from and amendments to that document) and the charters for each of our Audit and Compliance, Nominating and Corporate Governance and Executive Compensation Committees are available on our website, and we will mail copies of the foregoing documents to stockholders, free of charge, upon request to our Corporate Secretary at Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654.
10
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATION
Healthcare Regulation
Overview
Our tenants, operators and managers are typically subject to extensive and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to quality of care, licensure and certificate of need, government reimbursement, fraud and abuse practices, qualifications of personnel, adequacy of plant and equipment, and other laws and regulations governing the operation of healthcare facilities. We expect that the healthcare industry will, in general, continue to face increased regulation and pressure in these areas. The applicable rules are wide-ranging and can subject our tenants, operators and managers to civil, criminal, and administrative sanctions, including: the possible loss of accreditation or license; denial of reimbursement; imposition of fines; suspension, decertification, or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs; or facility closure. Changes in laws or regulations, reimbursement policies, enforcement activity and regulatory non-compliance by tenants, operators and managers can all have a significant effect on their operations and financial condition, which in turn may adversely impact us, as detailed below and set forth under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Although the properties within our portfolio may be subject to varying levels of governmental scrutiny, we expect that the healthcare industry, in general, will continue to face increased regulation and pressure in the areas of fraud, waste and abuse, cost control, healthcare management and provision of services, among others. We also expect that efforts by third-party payors, such as the federal Medicare program, state Medicaid programs and private insurance carriers (including health maintenance organizations and other health plans), to impose greater discounts and more stringent cost controls upon operators (through changes in reimbursement rates and methodologies, discounted fee structures, the assumption by healthcare providers of all or a portion of the financial risk or otherwise) will intensify and continue. A significant expansion of applicable federal, state or local laws and regulations, existing or future healthcare reform measures, new interpretations of existing laws and regulations, changes in enforcement priorities, or significant limits on the scope of services reimbursed or reductions in reimbursement rates could have a material adverse effect on certain of our operators’ liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and, in turn, their ability to satisfy their contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
Licensure, Certification and CONs
In general, the operators of our skilled nursing facilities and hospitals must be licensed and periodically certified through various regulatory agencies that determine compliance with federal, state and local laws to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Legal requirements pertaining to such licensure and certification relate to the quality of medical care provided by the operator, qualifications of the operator’s administrative personnel and clinical staff, adequacy of the physical plant and equipment and continuing compliance with applicable laws and regulations. A loss of licensure or certification could adversely affect a skilled nursing facility or hospital operator’s ability to receive payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which, in turn, could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its obligations to us.
In addition, many of our skilled nursing facilities and hospitals are subject to state CON laws that require governmental approval prior to the development or expansion of healthcare facilities and services. The approval process in these states generally requires a facility to demonstrate the need for additional or expanded healthcare facilities or services. CONs, where applicable, are also sometimes necessary for changes in ownership or control of licensed facilities, addition of beds, investment in major capital equipment, introduction of new services or termination of services previously approved through the CON process. CON laws and regulations may restrict an operator’s ability to expand our properties and grow its business in certain circumstances, which could have an adverse effect on the operator’s revenues and, in turn, its ability to make rental payments under and otherwise comply with the terms of our leases. See “Risk Factors-Risks Arising from Our Business-If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Compared to skilled nursing facilities and hospitals, seniors housing communities (other than those that receive Medicaid payments) do not receive significant funding from governmental healthcare programs and are subject to relatively few, if any, federal regulations. Instead, to the extent they are regulated, such regulation consists primarily of state and local laws governing licensure, provision of services, staffing requirements and other operational matters, which vary greatly from one jurisdiction to another. Although recent growth in the U.S. seniors housing industry has attracted the attention of various federal agencies that believe more federal regulation of these properties is necessary, Congress thus far has deferred to state regulation of seniors housing communities. However, as a result of this growth and increased federal scrutiny, some states have revised and strengthened their regulation of seniors housing communities, and more states are expected to do the same in the future.
11
Fraud and Abuse Enforcement
Skilled nursing facilities, hospitals and senior housing communities that receive Medicaid payments are subject to various complex federal, state and local laws and regulations that govern healthcare providers' relationships and arrangements and prohibit fraudulent and abusive business practices. These laws and regulations include, among others:
•
Federal and state false claims acts, which, among other things, prohibit healthcare providers from filing false claims or making false statements to receive payment from Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental healthcare programs;
•
Federal and state anti-kickback and fee-splitting statutes, including the Medicare and Medicaid anti-kickback statute, which prohibit the payment, receipt or solicitation of any remuneration to induce referrals of patients for items or services covered by a governmental healthcare program, including Medicare and Medicaid;
•
Federal and state physician self-referral laws, including the federal Stark Law, which generally prohibits physicians from referring patients enrolled in certain governmental healthcare programs to providers of certain designated health services in which the referring physician or an immediate family member of the referring physician has an ownership or other financial interest;
•
The federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which authorizes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to impose civil penalties administratively for fraudulent acts; and
•
State and federal data privacy and security laws, including the privacy and security rules of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), which provide for the privacy and security of certain individually identifiable health information.
Violating these healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations may result in criminal and civil penalties, such as punitive sanctions, damage assessments, monetary penalties, imprisonment, denial of Medicare and Medicaid payments, and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The responsibility for enforcing these laws and regulations lies with a variety or federal, state and local governmental agencies, however they can also be enforced by private litigants through federal and state false claims acts and other laws that allow private individuals to bring whistleblower suits known as
qui tam
actions.
Congress has significantly increased funding to the governmental agencies charged with enforcing the healthcare fraud and abuse laws to facilitate increased audits, investigations and prosecutions of providers suspected of healthcare fraud. As a result, government investigations and enforcement actions brought against healthcare providers have increased significantly in recent years and are expected to continue. A violation of federal or state anti-fraud and abuse laws or regulations by an operator of our properties could have a material adverse effect on the operator’s liquidity, financial condition or results of operations, which could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
Reimbursement
The majority of skilled nursing facilities reimbursement, and a significant percentage of hospital reimbursement, is through Medicare and Medicaid. Medical buildings and other healthcare related properties have provider tenants that participate in Medicare and Medicaid. These programs are often their largest source of funding. Seniors housing communities generally do not receive funding from Medicare or Medicaid, but their ability to retain their residents is impacted by policy decisions and initiatives established by the administrators of Medicare and Medicaid. The passage of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) in 2010 allowed formerly uninsured Americans to acquire coverage and utilize additional health care services. In addition, the ACA gave the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services new authorities to implement Medicaid waiver and pilot programs that impact healthcare and long term custodial care reimbursement by Medicare and Medicaid. These activities promote “aging in place”, allowing senior citizens to stay longer in seniors housing communities, and diverting or delaying their admission into skilled nursing facilities. The potential risks that accompany these regulatory and market changes are discussed below.
•
As a result of the ACA, and specifically Medicaid expansion and establishment of Health Insurance Exchanges providing subsidized health insurance, an estimated seventeen million more Americans have health insurance. These newly-insured Americans utilize services delivered by providers at medical buildings and other healthcare facilities. The ACA remains controversial and continued attempts to repeal or reverse aspects of the law could result in insured individuals losing coverage, and consequently foregoing services offered by provider tenants in medical buildings and other healthcare facilities.
12
•
Enabled by the Medicare Modernization Act (2003) and subsequent laws, Medicare and Medicaid have implemented pilot programs (officially termed demonstrations or models) to “divert” elderly from skilled nursing facilitates and promote “aging in place” in “the least restrictive environment.” Several states have implemented Home and Community-based Medicaid waiver programs that increase the support services available to senior citizens in senior housing, lengthening the time that many seniors can live outside of a skilled nursing facility. These Medicaid waiver programs are subject to re-approval and pilots are time-limited. Roll-back or expiration of these programs could have an adverse effect on the senior housing market.
•
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is currently in the midst of transitioning Medicare from a traditional fee for service reimbursement model to capitated, value-based, and bundled payment approaches in which the government pays a set amount for each beneficiary for a defined period of time, based on that person’s underlying medical needs, rather than the actual services provided. The result is increasing use of management tools to oversee individual providers and coordinate their services. This puts downward pressure on the number and expense of services provided. Roughly eight million Medicare beneficiaries now receive care via Accountable Care Organizations, and Medicare Advantage health plans now provide care for roughly seventeen million Medicare beneficiaries. The continued trend toward capitated, value-based, and bundled payment approaches has the potential diminish the market for certain healthcare providers, particularly specialist physicians and providers of particular diagnostic technologies such Medical Resonance Imaging services. This could adversely impact the medical properties that house these physicians and medical technology providers.
•
The majority of Medicare payments continue to be made through traditional Medicare Part A and Part B fee-for-service schedules. The Medicare and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“MACRA”) addresses the risk of a Sustainable Growth Rate cut in Medicare payments for physician services. However, other annual Medicare payment regulations, particularly with respect to certain hospitals, skilled nursing care, and home health services have resulted in lower net pay increases than providers of those services have often expected. In addition, MACRA establishes a multi-year transition into pay-for-quality approaches for Medicare physicians and other providers. This will include payment reductions for providers who do not meet government quality standards. The implementation of pay-for-quality models is expected to produce funding disparities that could adversely impact some provider tenants in medical buildings and other health care properties.
For the year ended December 31, 2015, approximately 11% of our total revenues and 19% of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were attributable to skilled nursing facilities and hospitals in which our third-party tenants receive reimbursement for their services under governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. We are neither a participant in, nor a direct recipient of, any reimbursement under these programs with respect to those leased facilities.
Environmental Regulation
As an owner of real property, we are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding environmental, health and safety matters.
These laws and regulations address, among other things, asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, fuel oil management, wastewater discharges, air emissions, radioactive materials, medical wastes, and hazardous wastes, and, in certain cases, the costs of complying with these laws and regulations and the penalties for non-compliance can be substantial. With respect to our properties that are operated or managed by third parties, we may be held primarily or jointly and severally liable for costs relating to the investigation and clean-up of any property from which there is or has been an actual or threatened release of a regulated material and any other affected properties, regardless of whether we knew of or caused the release. Such costs typically are not limited by law or regulation and could exceed the property’s value. In addition, we may be liable for certain other costs, such as governmental fines and injuries to persons, property or natural resources, as a result of any such actual or threatened release. See “Risk Factors-Risks Arising from Our Business-We could incur substantial liabilities and costs if any of our properties are found to be contaminated with hazardous substances or we become involved in any environmental disputes” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Under the terms of our lease, management and other agreements, we generally have a right to indemnification by the tenants, operators and managers of our properties for any contamination caused by them. However, we cannot assure you that our tenants, operators and managers will have the financial capability or willingness to satisfy their respective indemnification obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness to do so may require us to satisfy the underlying environmental claims.
13
In general, we have also agreed to indemnify our tenants and operators against any environmental claims (including penalties and clean-up costs) resulting from any condition arising in, on or under, or relating to, the leased properties at any time before the applicable lease commencement date. With respect to our senior living operating portfolio, we have agreed to indemnify our managers against any environmental claims (including penalties and clean- up costs) resulting from any condition on those properties, unless the manager caused or contributed to that condition.
We did not make any material capital expenditures in connection with environmental, health, and safety laws, ordinances and regulations in 2015 and do not expect that we will be required to make any such material capital expenditures during 2016.
Canada
In Canada, seniors housing communities are currently generally subject to significantly less regulation than skilled nursing facilities and hospitals, and the regulation of such facilities is principally a matter of provincial and municipal jurisdiction. As a result, the regulatory regimes that apply to seniors housing communities vary depending on the province (and in certain circumstances, the city) in which a facility is located. Recently, certain Canadian provinces have taken steps to implement regulatory measures that could result in enhanced regulation for seniors housing communities in such provinces.
CERTAIN U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS
The following discussion summarizes certain U.S. federal income tax considerations that may be relevant to you as a holder of our stock. It is not tax advice, nor does it purport to address all aspects of U.S. federal income taxation that may be important to particular stockholders in light of their personal circumstances or to certain types of stockholders, such as insurance companies, tax-exempt organizations (except to the extent discussed below under “-Treatment of Tax-Exempt Stockholders”), financial institutions, pass-through entities (or investors in such entities) or broker-dealers, and non-U.S. individuals and entities (except to the extent discussed below under “-Special Tax Considerations for Non-U.S. Stockholders”), that may be subject to special rules.
The statements in this section are based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), U.S. Treasury Regulations, Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) rulings, and judicial decisions now in effect, all of which are subject to change or different interpretation, possibly with retroactive effect. The laws governing the U.S. federal income tax treatment of REITs and their stockholders are highly technical and complex, and this discussion is qualified in its entirety by the authorities listed above. We cannot assure you that new laws, interpretations of law or court decisions will not cause any statement herein to be inaccurate.
Federal Income Taxation of Ventas
We elected REIT status beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. We believe that we have satisfied the requirements to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes for all tax years starting in 1999, and we intend to continue to do so. By qualifying for taxation as a REIT, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on net income that we currently distribute to stockholders, which substantially eliminates the “double taxation” (i.e., taxation at both the corporate and stockholder levels) that results from investment in a C corporation (i.e., a corporation generally subject to full corporate-level tax).
Notwithstanding such qualification, we are subject to federal income tax on any undistributed taxable income, including undistributed net capital gains, at regular corporate rates. In addition, we are subject to a 4% excise tax if we do not satisfy specific REIT distribution requirements. See “-Requirements for Qualification as a REIT-Annual Distribution Requirements.” Under certain circumstances, we may be subject to the “alternative minimum tax” on our undistributed items of tax preference. If we have net income from the sale or other disposition of “foreclosure property” (as described below) held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business or certain other non-qualifying income from foreclosure property, we are subject to tax at the highest corporate rate on that income. See “-Requirements for Qualification as a REIT-Foreclosure Property.” In addition, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions” (which are, in general, certain sales or other dispositions of property (other than foreclosure property) held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business), that income is subject to a 100% tax.
We also may be subject to “Built-in Gains Tax” on any appreciated asset that we own or acquire that was previously owned by a C corporation. If we dispose of any such asset and recognize gain on the disposition during the five-year period immediately after the asset was owned by a C corporation (either prior to our REIT election, or through stock acquisition or merger), then we generally are subject to regular corporate income tax on the gain equal to the lesser of the recognized gain at the time of disposition or the built-in gain in that asset as of the date it became a REIT asset.
14
If we fail to satisfy either of the gross income tests for qualification as a REIT (as discussed below), but maintain such qualification under the relief provisions of the Code, we will be subject to a 100% tax on the gross income attributable to the amount by which we failed the applicable test, multiplied by a fraction intended to reflect our profitability. In addition, if we violate one or more of the REIT asset tests (as discussed below), we may avoid a loss of our REIT status if we qualify under certain relief provisions and, among other things, pay a tax equal to the greater of $50,000 or the highest corporate tax rate multiplied by the net income generated by the non-qualifying asset during a specified period. If we fail to satisfy any requirement for REIT qualification, other than the gross income or assets tests mentioned above, but maintain such qualification by meeting certain other requirements, we may be subject to a $50,000 penalty for each failure. Finally, we will incur a 100% excise tax on the income derived from certain transactions with a taxable REIT subsidiary (including rental income derived from leasing properties to a taxable REIT subsidiary) that are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis.
See “-Requirements for Qualification as a REIT” below for other circumstances in which we may be required to pay federal taxes.
Requirements for Qualification as a REIT
To qualify as a REIT, we must meet the requirements discussed below relating to our organization, sources of income, nature of assets and distributions of income to our stockholders.
Organizational Requirements
The Code defines a REIT as a corporation, trust or association: (i) that is managed by one or more directors or trustees; (ii) the beneficial ownership of which is evidenced by transferable shares or by transferable certificates of beneficial interest; (iii) that would be taxable as a domestic corporation but for Sections 856 through 859 of the Code; (iv) that is neither a financial institution nor an insurance company subject to certain provisions of the Code; (v) the beneficial ownership of which is held by 100 or more persons during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months, or during a proportionate part of a shorter taxable year (the “100 Shareholder Rule”); (vi) not more than 50% in value of the outstanding stock of which is owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Code to include certain entities) during the last half of each taxable year (the “5/50 Rule”); (vii) that makes an election to be a REIT (or has made such election for a prior taxable year) and satisfies all relevant filing and other administrative requirements established by the IRS that must be met in order to elect and to maintain REIT status; (viii) that uses a calendar year for federal income tax purposes; and (ix) that meets certain other tests, described below, regarding the nature of its income and assets.
We believe, but cannot assure you, that we have satisfied and will continue to satisfy the organizational requirements for qualification as a REIT. Although our certificate of incorporation contains certain limits on the ownership of our stock that are intended to prevent us from failing the 5/50 Rule or the 100 Shareholder Rule, we cannot assure you as to the effectiveness of those limits.
To qualify as a REIT, a corporation also may not have (as of the end of the taxable year) any earnings and profits that were accumulated in periods before it elected REIT status or that are from acquired non-REIT corporations. We believe that we have not had any accumulated earnings and profits that are attributable to non-REIT periods or from acquired corporations that were not REITs, although the IRS is entitled to challenge that determination.
Gross Income Tests
We must satisfy two annual gross income requirements to qualify as a REIT:
•
At least 75% of our gross income (excluding gross income from prohibited transactions) for each taxable year must consist of defined types of income derived directly or indirectly from investments relating to real property or mortgages on real property (including pledges of equity interest in certain entities holding real property and also including “rents from real property” (as defined in the Code)) and, in certain circumstances, interest on certain types of temporary investment income; and
•
At least 95% of our gross income (excluding gross income from prohibited transactions) for each taxable year must be derived from such real property or temporary investments, dividends, interest and gain from the sale or disposition of stock or securities, or from any combination of the foregoing.
We believe, but cannot assure you, that we have been and will continue to be in compliance with these gross income tests. If we fail to satisfy one or both tests for any taxable year, we nevertheless may qualify as a REIT for that year if we qualify
15
under certain relief provisions of the Code, in which case we would be subject to a 100% tax on the gross income attributable to the amount by which we failed the applicable test. If we fail to satisfy one or both tests and do not qualify under the relief provisions for any taxable year, we will not qualify as a REIT for that year, which would have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Asset Tests
At the close of each quarter of our taxable year, we must satisfy the following tests relating to the nature of our assets:
•
At least 75% of the value of our total assets must be represented by cash or cash items (including certain receivables), government securities, “real estate assets” (including interests in real property and in mortgages on real property and shares in other qualifying REITs) (for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, the term “real estate assets” also includes (i) unsecured debt instruments of REITs that are required to file annual and periodic reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act (“Publicly Offered REITs”) (ii) personal property securing a mortgage secured by both real property and personal property if the fair market value of such personal property does not exceed 15% of the combined fair market value of all such personal and real property and (iii) personal property leased in connection with a lease of real property for which the rent attributable to personal property is not greater than 15% of the total rent received under the lease) or, in cases where we raise new capital through stock or long-term (i.e., having a maturity of at least five years) debt offerings, temporary investments in stock or debt instruments during the one-year period following our receipt of such capital (the “75% asset test”); and
•
Of the investments not meeting the requirements of the 75% asset test, the value of any single issuer’s debt and equity securities that we own (other than our equity interests in any entity classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, the stock or debt of a taxable REIT subsidiary or the stock or debt of a qualified REIT subsidiary or other disregarded entity subsidiary) may not exceed 5% of the value of our total assets (the “5% asset test”), and we may not own more than 10% of any single issuer’s outstanding voting securities (the “10% voting securities test”) or more than 10% of the value of any single issuer’s outstanding securities (the “10% value test”), subject to limited “safe harbor” exceptions.
•
No more than 25% (20% for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017) of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of taxable REIT subsidiaries (the “25% TRS Test” or after December 31, 2017, the “20% TRS Test”).
•
For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015, the aggregate value of all unsecured debt instruments of Publicly Offered REITs that we hold may not exceed 25% of the value of our total assets.”
We believe, but cannot assure you, that we have been and will continue to be in compliance with the asset tests described above. If we fail to satisfy one or more asset tests at the end of any quarter, we nevertheless may continue to qualify as a REIT if we satisfied all of the asset tests at the close of the preceding calendar quarter and the discrepancy between the value of our assets and the asset test requirements is due to changes in the market values and not caused in any part by our acquisition of non-qualifying assets.
Furthermore, if we fail to satisfy any of the asset tests at the end of any calendar quarter without curing that failure within 30 days after quarter end, we would fail to qualify as a REIT unless we qualified under certain relief provisions enacted as part of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. Under one relief provision, we would continue to qualify as a REIT if our failure to satisfy the 5% asset test, the 10% voting securities test or the 10% value test is due to our ownership of assets having a total value not exceeding the lesser of 1% of our assets at the end of the relevant quarter or $10 million and we disposed of those assets (or otherwise met such asset tests) within six months after the end of the quarter in which the failure was identified. If we fail to satisfy any of the asset tests for a particular quarter but do not qualify under the relief provision described in the preceding sentence, then we would be deemed to have satisfied the relevant asset test if: (i) following identification of the failure, we filed a schedule containing a description of each asset that caused the failure; (ii) the failure was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect; (iii) we disposed of the non-qualifying asset (or otherwise met the relevant asset test) within six months after the end of the quarter in which the failure was identified; and (iv) we paid a penalty tax equal to the greater of $50,000 or the highest corporate tax rate multiplied by the net income generated by the non-qualifying asset during the period beginning on the first date of the failure and ending on the date we disposed of the asset (or otherwise cured the asset test failure). We cannot predict whether in all circumstances we would be entitled to the benefit of these relief provisions, and if we fail to satisfy any of the asset tests and do not qualify for the relief provisions, we will lose our REIT status, which would have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
16
Foreclosure Property
The foreclosure property rules permit us (by our election) to foreclose or repossess properties without being disqualified as a REIT as a result of receiving income that does not qualify under the gross income tests. However, in such a case, we would be subject to a corporate tax on the net non-qualifying income from “foreclosure property,” and the after-tax amount would increase the dividends we would be required to distribute to stockholders. See “-Annual Distribution Requirements”. The corporate tax imposed on non-qualifying income would not apply to income that qualifies as “good REIT income,” such as a lease of qualified healthcare property to a taxable REIT subsidiary, where the taxable REIT subsidiary engages an “eligible independent contractor” to manage and operate the property.
Foreclosure property treatment will end on the first day on which we enter into a lease of the applicable property that will give rise to income that does not constitute “good REIT income” under Section 856(c)(3) of the Code, but will not end if the lease will give rise only to good REIT income. Foreclosure property treatment also will end if any construction takes place on the property (other than completion of a building or other improvement that was more than 10% complete before default became imminent). Foreclosure property treatment (other than for qualified healthcare property) is available for an initial period of three years and may, in certain circumstances, be extended for an additional three years. Foreclosure property treatment for qualified healthcare property is available for an initial period of two years and may, in certain circumstances, be extended for an additional four years.
Taxable REIT Subsidiaries
A taxable REIT subsidiary, or “TRS,” is a corporation subject to tax as a regular C corporation. Generally, a TRS can own assets that cannot be owned by a REIT directly and can perform tenant services (excluding the direct or indirect operation or management of a lodging or healthcare facility) that would otherwise disqualify the REIT’s rental income under the gross income tests. Notwithstanding general restrictions on related party rent, a REIT can lease healthcare properties to a TRS if the TRS does not manage or operate the properties and instead engages an eligible independent contractor to manage them. We are permitted to own up to 100% of a TRS, subject to the 25% TRS Test (or 20% TRS Test, as applicable)but the Code imposes certain limits on the ability of the TRS to deduct interest payments made to us. In addition, we are subject to a 100% penalty tax on any excess payments received by us or any excess expenses deducted by the TRS if the economic arrangements between the REIT, the REIT’s tenants and the TRS are not comparable to similar arrangements among unrelated parties.
Annual Distribution Requirements
In order to be taxed as a REIT, we are required to distribute dividends (other than capital gain dividends) to our stockholders in an amount at least equal to the sum of (i) 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and our net capital gain) and (ii) 90% of the net income (after tax), if any, from foreclosure property, minus the sum of certain items of non-cash income. These dividends must be paid in the taxable year to which they relate, but may be paid in the following taxable year if (i) they are declared in October, November or December, payable to stockholders of record on a specified date in one of those months and actually paid during January of such following year or (ii) they are declared before we timely file our tax return for such year and paid on or before the first regular dividend payment after such declaration, and we elect on our federal income tax return for the prior year to have a specified amount of the subsequent dividend treated as paid in the prior year. To the extent we do not distribute all of our net capital gain or at least 90%, but less than 100%, of our REIT taxable income, as adjusted, we will be subject to tax on the undistributed amount at regular capital gains and ordinary corporate tax rates, except to the extent of our net operating loss or capital loss carryforwards. If we pay any Built-in Gains Taxes, those taxes will be deductible in computing REIT taxable income. Moreover, if we fail to distribute during each calendar year (or, in the case of distributions with declaration and record dates falling in the last three months of the calendar year, by the end of January following such year) at least the sum of 85% of our REIT ordinary income for such year, 95% of our REIT capital gain net income for such year (other than long-term capital gain we elect to retain and treat as having been distributed to stockholders), and any undistributed taxable income from prior periods, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the excess of such required distribution over the amounts actually distributed.
We believe, but cannot assure you, that we have satisfied the annual distribution requirements for the year of our initial REIT election and each subsequent year through the year ended
December 31, 2015
. Although we intend to satisfy the annual distribution requirements to continue to qualify as a REIT for the year ending December 31,
2016
and thereafter, economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations could limit our ability to meet those requirements.
We have net operating loss carryforwards that we may use to reduce our annual distribution requirements. See “Note 13-Income Taxes” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
17
Failure to Continue to Qualify
If we fail to satisfy one or more requirements for REIT qualification, other than by violating a gross income or asset test for which relief is available under the circumstances described above, we would retain our REIT qualification if the failure is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect and if we pay a penalty of $50,000 for each such failure. We cannot predict whether in all circumstances we would be entitled to the benefit of this relief provision.
If our election to be taxed as a REIT is revoked or terminated in any taxable year (e.g., due to a failure to meet the REIT qualification tests without qualifying for any applicable relief provisions), we would be subject to tax (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on our taxable income at regular corporate rates (for all open tax years beginning with the year our REIT election is revoked or terminated), and we would not be required to make distributions to stockholders, nor would we be entitled to deduct any such distributions. All distributions to stockholders (to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits) would be taxable as ordinary income, except to the extent such dividends are eligible for the qualified dividends rate generally available to non-corporate holders, and, subject to certain limitations, corporate stockholders would be eligible for the dividends received deduction. In addition, we would be prohibited from re-electing REIT status for the four taxable years following the year during which we ceased to qualify as a REIT, unless certain relief provisions of the Code applied. We cannot predict whether we would be entitled to such relief.
New Partnership Audit Rules
The recently enacted Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 changes the rules applicable to U.S. federal income tax audits of partnerships. Under the new rules (which are generally effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017), among other changes and subject to certain exceptions, any audit adjustment to items of income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit of a partnership (and any partner’s distributive share thereof) is determined, and taxes, interest, or penalties attributable thereto are assessed and collected, at the partnership level. Although it is uncertain how these new rules will be implemented, it is possible that they could result in partnerships in which we directly or indirect invest being required to pay additional taxes, interest and penalties as a result of an audit adjustment, and we, as a direct or indirect partner of these partnerships, could be required to bear the economic burden of those taxes, interest, and penalties even though we, as a REIT, may not otherwise have been required to pay additional corporate-level taxes had we owned the assets of the partnership directly. The changes created by these new rules are sweeping and in many respects dependent on the promulgation of future regulations or other guidance by the U.S. Treasury. You should consult with your tax advisors with respect to these changes and their potential impact on your investment in our common stock.
Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Stockholders
As used in this discussion, the term “U.S. Stockholder” refers to any beneficial owner of our stock that is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, an individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States, a corporation created or organized in or under the laws of the United States, any state thereof or the District of Columbia, an estate the income of which must be included in gross income for U.S. federal income tax purposes regardless of its source, or a trust if (i) a U.S. court is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of such trust and one or more U.S. persons have authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust or (ii) the trust has elected under applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations to retain its pre-August 20, 1996 classification as a U.S. person. If an entity treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes holds our stock, the tax treatment of a partner in the partnership will generally depend on the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. Partners in partnerships holding our stock should consult their tax advisors. This section assumes the U.S. Stockholder holds our stock as a capital asset (that is, for investment).
Provided we qualify as a REIT, distributions made to our taxable U.S. Stockholders out of current or accumulated earnings and profits (and not designated as capital gain dividends) generally will be taxable to such U.S. Stockholders as ordinary income and will not be eligible for the qualified dividends rate generally available to non-corporate holders or for the dividends received deduction generally available to corporations. Distributions that are designated as capital gain dividends will be taxed as a long-term capital gain (to the extent such distributions do not exceed our actual net capital gain for the taxable year) without regard to the period for which the stockholder has held our stock. The distributions we designate as capital gain dividends may not exceed our dividends paid for the taxable year, including dividends paid the following year that we treated as paid in the current year. Distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits will not be taxable to a U.S. Stockholder to the extent they do not exceed the U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock (determined on a share-by-share basis), but rather will reduce the U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock. To the extent that distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits exceed the U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock, such distributions will be included in income as capital gains and taxable at a rate that will depend on the U.S. Stockholder’s holding period for our stock. Any distribution declared by us and payable to a stockholder of record on a specified date in October, November or
18
December of any year will be treated as both paid by us and received by the stockholder on December 31 of that year, provided that we actually pay the distribution during January of the following calendar year.
We may elect to treat all or a part of our undistributed net capital gain as if it had been distributed to our stockholders. If we so elect, our U.S. Stockholders would be required to include in their income as long-term capital gain their proportionate share of our undistributed net capital gain, as designated by us. Each U.S. Stockholder would be deemed to have paid its proportionate share of the income tax imposed on us with respect to such undistributed net capital gain, and this amount would be credited or refunded to the U.S. Stockholder. In addition, the U.S. Stockholder’s tax basis of our stock would be increased by its proportionate share of undistributed net capital gains included in its income, less its proportionate share of the income tax imposed on us with respect to such gains.
U.S. Stockholders may not include in their individual income tax returns any of our net operating losses or net capital losses. Instead, we may carry over those losses for potential offset against our future income, subject to certain limitations. Taxable distributions from us and gain from the disposition of our stock will not be treated as passive activity income, and, therefore, U.S. Stockholders generally will not be able to apply any “passive activity losses” (such as losses from certain types of limited partnerships in which the U.S. Stockholder is a limited partner) against such income. In addition, taxable distributions from us generally will be treated as investment income for purposes of the investment interest limitations.
We will notify stockholders after the close of our taxable year as to the portions of the distributions attributable to that year that constitute ordinary income, return of capital and capital gain. To the extent that a portion of the distribution is designated as a capital gain dividend, we will notify stockholders as to the portion that is a “20% rate gain distribution” and the portion that is an unrecaptured Section 1250 distribution. A 20% rate gain distribution is a capital gain distribution to U.S. Stockholders that are individuals, estates or trusts that is taxable at a maximum rate of 20%. An unrecaptured Section 1250 gain distribution is taxable to U.S. Stockholders that are individuals, estates or trusts at a maximum rate of 25%.
Taxation of U.S. Stockholders on the Disposition of Shares of Stock
In general, a U.S. Stockholder must treat any gain or loss realized upon a taxable disposition of our stock as long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Stockholder has held the stock for more than one year, and otherwise as short-term capital gain or loss. However, a U.S. Stockholder must treat any loss upon a sale or exchange of shares of our stock held for six months or less as a long-term capital loss to the extent of capital gain dividends and any other actual or deemed distributions from us which the U.S. Stockholder treats as long-term capital gain. All or a portion of any loss that a U.S. Stockholder realizes upon a taxable disposition of our stock may be disallowed if the U.S. Stockholder purchases other shares of our stock (or certain options to acquire our stock) within 30 days before or after the disposition.
Medicare Tax on Investment Income
Certain U.S. Stockholders who are individuals, estates or trusts and whose income exceeds certain thresholds are required to pay a 3.8% Medicare tax on dividends and certain other investment income, including capital gains from the sale or other disposition of our stock.
Treatment of Tax-Exempt Stockholders
Tax-exempt organizations, including qualified employee pension and profit sharing trusts and individual retirement accounts (collectively, “Exempt Organizations”), generally are exempt from U.S. federal income taxation but are subject to taxation on their unrelated business taxable income (“UBTI”). While many investments in real estate generate UBTI, a ruling published by the IRS states that dividend distributions by a REIT to an exempt employee pension trust do not constitute UBTI, provided that the shares of the REIT are not otherwise used in an unrelated trade or business of the exempt employee pension trust. Based on that ruling, and subject to the exceptions discussed below, amounts distributed by us to Exempt Organizations generally should not constitute UBTI. However, if an Exempt Organization finances its acquisition of our stock with debt, a portion of its income from us will constitute UBTI pursuant to the “debt-financed property” rules. Social clubs, voluntary employee benefit associations, supplemental unemployment benefit trusts and qualified group legal services plans that are exempt from taxation under paragraphs (7), (9), (17) and (20), respectively, of Section 501(c) of the Code are subject to different UBTI rules, which generally require them to characterize distributions from us as UBTI, and in certain circumstances, a pension trust that owns more than 10% of our stock is required to treat a percentage of the dividends from us as UBTI.
19
Special Tax Considerations for Non-U.S. Stockholders
As used herein, the term “Non-U.S. Stockholder” refers to any beneficial owner of our stock that is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, a nonresident alien individual, foreign corporation, foreign estate or foreign trust, but does not include any foreign stockholder whose investment in our stock is “effectively connected” with the conduct of a trade or business in the United States. Such a foreign stockholder, in general, is subject to U.S. federal income tax with respect to its investment in our stock in the same manner as a U.S. Stockholder (subject to applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals). In addition, a foreign corporation receiving income that is treated as effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business also may be subject to an additional 30% “branch profits tax” on its effectively connected earnings and profits (subject to adjustments) unless an applicable tax treaty provides a lower rate or an exemption. Certain certification requirements must be satisfied in order for effectively connected income to be exempt from withholding.
Distributions to Non-U.S. Stockholders that are not attributable to gain from sales or exchanges by us of U.S. real property interests and are not designated by us as capital gain dividends (or deemed distributions of retained capital gains) are treated as dividends of ordinary income to the extent that they are made out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits. Such distributions ordinarily are subject to a withholding tax equal to 30% of the gross amount of the distribution unless an applicable tax treaty reduces or eliminates that tax. Distributions in excess of our current and accumulated earnings and profits are not taxable to a Non-U.S. Stockholder to the extent that such distributions do not exceed the Non-U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock (determined on a share-by-share basis), but rather reduce the Non-U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock. To the extent that distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits exceed the Non-U.S. Stockholder’s adjusted basis of our stock, such distributions will give rise to tax liability if the Non-U.S. Stockholder would otherwise be subject to tax on any gain from the sale or disposition of our stock, as described below.
We expect to withhold U.S. tax at the rate of 30% on the gross amount of any dividends, other than dividends treated as attributable to gain from sales or exchanges of U.S. real property interests and capital gain dividends, paid to a Non-U.S. Stockholder, unless (i) a lower treaty rate applies and the required IRS Form W-8BEN or IRS Form W-8BEN-E evidencing eligibility for that reduced rate is filed with us or the appropriate withholding agent or (ii) the Non-U.S. Stockholder files an IRS Form W-8ECI or a successor form with us or the appropriate withholding agent properly claiming that the distributions are effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Stockholder’s conduct of a U.S. trade or business.
For any year in which we qualify as a REIT, distributions to a Non-U.S. Stockholder that owns more than 10% of our shares at any time during the one-year period ending on the date of distribution and that are attributable to gain from sales or exchanges by us of U.S. real property interests will be taxed to the Non-U.S. Stockholder under the provisions of the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act of 1980 (“FIRPTA”) as if such gain were effectively connected with a U.S. business. Accordingly, a Non-U.S. Stockholder that owns more than 10% of our shares will be taxed at the normal capital gain rates applicable to a U.S. Stockholder (subject to any applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals) and would be required to file a U.S. federal income tax return. Distributions subject to FIRPTA also may be subject to a branch profits tax equal to 30% of its effectively connected earnings and profits (subject to adjustments) if the recipient is a corporate Non-U.S. Stockholder not entitled to treaty relief or exemption. Under FIRPTA, we are required to withhold 35% (which is higher than the maximum rate on long-term capital gains of non-corporate persons) of any distribution to a Non-U.S. Stockholder that owns more than 10% of our shares which is or could be designated as a capital gain dividend attributable to U.S. real property interests. Moreover, if we designate previously made distributions as capital gain dividends attributable to U.S. real property interests, subsequent distributions (up to the amount of such prior distributions) will be treated as capital gain dividends subject to FIRPTA withholding. This amount is creditable against the Non-U.S. Stockholder’s FIRPTA tax liability.
Distributions by us to a “qualified foreign pension fund,” within the meaning of Section 897(l) of the Code (“Qualified Foreign Pension Fund”), or any entity all of the interests of which are held by a Qualified Foreign Pension Fund, is exempt from FIRPTA, but may nonetheless be subject to U.S. federal dividend withholding tax unless an applicable tax treaty or Section 892 of the Code provides an exemption from such dividend withholding tax. Non-U.S. Stockholders who are Qualified Foreign Pension Funds should consult their tax advisors regarding the application of these rules.
If a Non-U.S. Stockholder does not own more than 10% of our shares at any time during the one-year period ending on the date of a distribution, any capital gain distributions, to the extent attributable to sales or exchanges by us of U.S. real property interests, will not be considered to be effectively connected with a U.S. business, and the Non-U.S. Stockholder would not be required to file a U.S. federal income tax return solely as a result of receiving such a distribution. In that case, the distribution will be treated as an ordinary dividend to that Non-U.S. Stockholder and taxed as an ordinary dividend that is not a capital gain distribution (and subject to withholding), as described above. In addition, the branch profits tax will not apply to the
20
distribution. Any capital gain distribution, to the extent not attributable to sales or exchanges by us of U.S. real property interests, generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation (regardless of the amount of our shares owned by a Non-U.S. Stockholder).
For so long as our stock continues to be regularly traded on an established securities market, the sale of such stock by any Non-U.S. Stockholder who is not a Ten Percent Non-U.S. Stockholder (as defined below) generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax (unless the Non-U.S. Stockholder is a nonresident alien individual who was present in the United States for more than 182 days during the taxable year of the sale and certain other conditions apply, in which case such gain (net of certain sources within the U.S., if any) will be subject to a 30% tax on a gross basis). A “Ten Percent Non-U.S. Stockholder” is a Non-U.S. Stockholder who, at some time during the five-year period preceding such sale or disposition, beneficially owned (including under certain attribution rules) more than 10% of the total fair market value of our stock (as outstanding from time to time).
In general, the sale or other taxable disposition of our stock by a Ten Percent Non-U.S. Stockholder also will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax if we are a “domestically controlled REIT.” A REIT is a “domestically controlled REIT” if, at all times during the five-year period preceding the disposition in question, less than 50% in value of its shares is held directly or indirectly by Non-U.S. Stockholders. For purposes of determining whether a REIT is a domestically controlled qualified REIT, certain special rules apply including the rule that a person who at all applicable times holds less than 5 percent of a class of stock that is “regularly traded” is treated as a U.S. person unless the REIT has actual knowledge that such person is not a U.S. person. Because our common stock is publicly traded, we believe, but cannot assure you, that we currently qualify as a domestically controlled REIT, nor can we assure you that we will so qualify at any time in the future. If we do not constitute a domestically controlled REIT, a Ten Percent Non-U.S. Stockholder generally will be taxed in the same manner as a U.S. Stockholder with respect to gain on the sale of our stock (subject to applicable alternative minimum tax and a special alternative minimum tax in the case of nonresident alien individuals). The sale or other taxable disposition of our stock by a Qualified Foreign Pension Fund, or any entity all of the interests of which are held by a Qualified Foreign Pension Fund, is exempt from U.S. tax irrespective of the level of its shareholding in us and of whether we are a domestically controlled REIT.
Special rules apply to certain collective investment funds that are “qualified shareholders” as defined in Section 897(k)(3) of the Code of a REIT. Such investors, which include publicly traded vehicles that meet certain requirements, should consult with their own tax advisors prior to making an investment in our shares.
A 30% withholding tax will currently be imposed on dividends paid on our stock and will be imposed on gross proceeds from a sale or redemption of our stock paid after December 31, 2018 to (i) foreign financial institutions including non-U.S. investment funds, unless they agree to collect and disclose to the IRS information regarding their direct and indirect U.S. account holders and (ii) certain other foreign entities, unless they certify certain information regarding their direct and indirect U.S. owners. To avoid withholding, foreign financial institutions will need to (i) enter into agreements with the IRS that state that they will provide the IRS information, including the names, addresses and taxpayer identification numbers of direct and indirect U.S. account holders, comply with due diligence procedures with respect to the identification of U.S. accounts, report to the IRS certain information with respect to U.S. accounts maintained, agree to withhold tax on certain payments made to non-compliant foreign financial institutions or to account holders who fail to provide the required information, and determine certain other information as to their account holders, or (ii) in the event that an applicable intergovernmental agreement and implementing legislation are adopted, provide local revenue authorities with similar account holder information or otherwise comply with the terms of the intergovernmental agreement and implementing legislation. Other foreign entities will need to either provide the name, address, and taxpayer identification number of each substantial U.S. owner or certifications of no substantial U.S. ownership unless certain exceptions apply or agree to provide certain information to other revenue authorities for transmittal to the IRS.
Information Reporting Requirements and Backup Withholding
Information returns may be filed with the IRS and backup withholding (at a rate of 28%) may be collected in connection with distributions paid or required to be treated as paid during each calendar year and payments of the proceeds of a sale or other disposition of our stock by a stockholder, unless such stockholder is a corporation, non-U.S. person or comes within certain other exempt categories and, when required, demonstrates this fact or provides a taxpayer identification number, certifies as to no loss of exemption from backup withholding and otherwise complies with the applicable requirements of the backup withholding rules. A stockholder who does not provide us with its correct taxpayer identification number also may be subject to penalties imposed by the IRS.
21
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Rather, the U.S. federal income tax liability of persons subject to backup withholding will be offset by the amount of tax withheld. If backup withholding results in an overpayment of U.S. federal income taxes, a refund or credit may be obtained from the IRS, provided the required information is furnished timely thereto.
As a general matter, backup withholding and information reporting will not apply to a payment of the proceeds of a sale of our stock by or through a foreign office of a foreign broker. Information reporting (but not backup withholding) will apply, however, to a payment of the proceeds of a sale of our stock by a foreign office of a broker that is a U.S. person, a foreign partnership that engaged during certain periods in the conduct of a trade or business in the United States or more than 50% of whose capital or profit interests are owned during certain periods by U.S. persons, any foreign person that derives 50% or more of its gross income for certain periods from the conduct of a trade or business in the United States, or a “controlled foreign corporation” for U.S. tax purposes, unless the broker has documentary evidence in its records that the holder is a Non-U.S. Stockholder and certain other conditions are satisfied, or the stockholder otherwise establishes an exemption. Payment to or through a U.S. office of a broker of the proceeds of a sale of our stock is subject to both backup withholding and information reporting unless the stockholder certifies under penalties of perjury that the stockholder is a Non-U.S. Stockholder or otherwise establishes an exemption. A stockholder may obtain a refund of any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules in excess of its U.S. federal income tax liability by timely filing the appropriate claim for a refund with the IRS.
Other Tax Consequences
State and Local Taxes
We and our stockholders may be subject to taxation by various states and localities, including those in which we or a stockholder transact business, own property or reside. State and local tax treatment may differ from the U.S. federal income tax treatment described above. Consequently, stockholders should consult their own tax advisers regarding the effect of state and local tax laws, in addition to federal, foreign and other tax laws, in connection with an investment in our stock.
Possible Legislative or Other Actions Affecting Tax Consequences
You should recognize that future legislative, judicial and administrative actions or decisions, which may be retroactive in effect, could adversely affect our federal income tax treatment or the tax consequences of an investment in shares of our stock. The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are continually under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department, resulting in statutory changes as well as promulgation of new, or revisions to existing, regulations and revised interpretations of established concepts. We cannot predict the likelihood of passage of any new tax legislation or other provisions, either directly or indirectly, affecting us or our stockholders or the value of an investment in our stock. Changes to the tax laws, such as the Protecting Americans From Tax Hikes Act of 2015 enacted on December 18, 2015 or the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 enacted on November 2, 2015, or interpretations thereof by the IRS and the Treasury, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect us or our stockholders.
ITEM 1A. Risk Factors
This section discusses the most significant factors that affect our business, operations and financial condition. It does not describe all risks and uncertainties applicable to us, our industry or ownership of our securities. If any of the following risks, or any other risks and uncertainties that are not addressed below or that we have not yet identified, actually occur, we could be materially adversely affected and the value of our securities could decline.
We have grouped these risk factors into three general categories:
•
Risks arising from our business;
•
Risks arising from our capital structure; and
•
Risks arising from our status as a REIT.
Risks Arising from Our Business
The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
As of
December 31, 2015
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, managed
268
of our seniors housing communities pursuant to long-term management agreements. These properties represent a substantial portion of our portfolio, based on their gross book
22
value, and account for a significant portion of our revenues and NOI. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, we rely on Atria’s and Sunrise’s personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on Atria and Sunrise to set appropriate resident fees, to provide accurate property-level financial results for our properties in a timely manner and to otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. For example, we depend on Atria’s and Sunrise’s ability to attract and retain skilled management personnel who are responsible for the day-to-day operations of our seniors housing communities. A shortage of nurses or other trained personnel or general inflationary pressures may force Atria or Sunrise to enhance its pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel, but it may not be able to offset these added costs by increasing the rates charged to residents. Any increase in labor costs and other property operating expenses, any failure by Atria or Sunrise to attract and retain qualified personnel, or significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership could adversely affect the income we receive from our seniors housing communities and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, any adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could impair its ability to manage our properties efficiently and effectively and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. If Atria or Sunrise experiences any significant financial, legal, accounting or regulatory difficulties due to a weak economy or otherwise, such difficulties could result in, among other adverse events, acceleration of its indebtedness, impairment of its continued access to capital, the enforcement of default remedies by its counterparties, or the commencement of insolvency proceedings by or against it under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, any one or a combination of which indirectly could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent account for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and operating income; any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent account for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI, and because our leases with Brookdale Senior Living and Ardent and the Kindred Master Leases are triple-net leases, we depend on Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent to pay all insurance, taxes, utilities and maintenance and repair expenses in connection with the leased properties. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, any failure by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to effectively conduct its operations or to maintain and improve our properties could adversely affect its business reputation and its ability to attract and retain patients and residents in our properties, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent have agreed to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation and liabilities arising in connection with their respective businesses, and we cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will have sufficient assets, income, access to financing and insurance coverage to enable them to satisfy their respective indemnification obligations.
We face potential adverse consequences of bankruptcy or insolvency by our tenants, operators, borrowers, managers and other obligors.
We are exposed to the risk that our tenants, operators, borrowers, managers or other obligors may become bankrupt or insolvent. Although our lease, loan and management agreements give us the right to exercise certain remedies in the event of default on the obligations owing to us or upon the occurrence of certain insolvency events, federal laws afford certain rights to a party that has filed for bankruptcy or reorganization. For example, a debtor-lessee may reject our lease in a bankruptcy proceeding, in which case our claim against the debtor-lessee for unpaid and future rents would be limited by the statutory cap of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This statutory cap could be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed under the lease, and any claim we have for unpaid rent might not be paid in full. In addition, a debtor-lessee may assert in a bankruptcy proceeding that our lease should be re-characterized as a financing agreement, in which case our rights and remedies as a lender, compared to a landlord, generally would be more limited. If a debtor-manager seeks bankruptcy protection, the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code would preclude us from enforcing our remedies against the manager unless relief is first obtained from the court having jurisdiction over the bankruptcy case. In any of these events, we also may be required to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, debt costs and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of our properties, avoid the imposition of liens on our properties or transition our properties to a new tenant, operator or manager.
23
We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed.
We are parties to long-term management agreements pursuant to which Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
268
of our seniors housing communities as of
December 31, 2015
. Most of our management agreements with Atria have terms expiring either July 31, 2024 or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic ten-year renewal periods, and our management agreements with Sunrise have terms ranging from 25 to 30 years (which commenced as early as 2004 and as recently as 2012). Our ability to terminate these long-term management agreements is limited to specific circumstances set forth in the agreements and may relate to all properties or a specific property or group of properties.
We may terminate any of our Atria management agreements upon the occurrence of an event of default by Atria in the performance of a material covenant or term thereof (including, in certain circumstances, the revocation of any license or certificate necessary for operation), subject in most cases to Atria’s right to cure such default, or upon the occurrence of certain insolvency events relating to Atria. In addition, we may terminate our management agreements with Atria based on the failure to achieve certain NOI targets or upon the payment of a fee.
Similarly, we may terminate any of our Sunrise management agreements upon the occurrence of an event of default by Sunrise in the performance of a material covenant or term thereof (including, in certain circumstances, the revocation of any license or certificate necessary for operation), subject in most cases to Sunrise’s right to cure such default, or upon the occurrence of certain insolvency events relating to Sunrise. We also may terminate most of our management agreements with Sunrise based on the failure to achieve certain NOI targets or to comply with certain expense control covenants, subject to certain rights of Sunrise to make cure payments to us, and upon the occurrence of certain other events or the existence of certain other conditions.
We continually monitor and assess our contractual rights and remedies under our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise. When determining whether to pursue any existing or future rights or remedies under those agreements, including termination rights, we consider numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations. In the event that we exercise our rights to terminate the Atria or Sunrise management agreements for any reason or such agreements are not renewed upon expiration of their terms, we would attempt to reposition the affected properties with another manager. Although we believe that many qualified national and regional seniors housing operators would be interested in managing our seniors housing communities, we cannot assure you that we would be able to locate another suitable manager or, if we are successful in locating such a manager, that it would manage the properties effectively. Moreover, the transition to a replacement manager would require approval by the applicable regulatory authorities and, in most cases, the mortgage lenders for the properties, and we cannot assure you that such approvals would be granted on a timely basis, if at all. Any inability to replace, or a lengthy delay in replacing, Atria or Sunrise as the manager of our seniors housing communities following termination or non-renewal of the applicable management agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
We cannot predict whether our tenants will renew existing leases beyond their current term. If our leases with Brookdale Senior Living or Ardent, the Kindred Master Leases or any of our other triple-net leases are not renewed, we would attempt to reposition those properties with another tenant or operator. In case of non-renewal, we generally have one year prior to expiration of the lease term to arrange for repositioning of the properties and our tenants are required to continue to perform all of their obligations (including the payment of all rental amounts) for the non-renewed assets until such expiration. However, following expiration of a lease term or if we exercise our right to replace a tenant or operator in default, rental payments on the related properties could decline or cease altogether while we reposition the properties with a suitable replacement tenant or operator. We also might not be successful in identifying suitable replacements or entering into leases or other arrangements with new tenants or operators on a timely basis or on terms as favorable to us as our current leases, if at all, and we may be required to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, debt costs and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of, and avoid the imposition of liens on, our properties while they are being repositioned. In addition, we may incur certain obligations and liabilities, including obligations to indemnify the replacement tenant or operator, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
In the event of non-renewal or a tenant default, our ability to reposition our properties with a suitable replacement tenant or operator could be significantly delayed or limited by state licensing, receivership, CON or other laws, as well as by the Medicare and Medicaid change-of-ownership rules, and we could incur substantial additional expenses in connection with any licensing, receivership or change-of-ownership proceedings. Our ability to locate and attract suitable replacement tenants also
24
could be impaired by the specialized healthcare uses or contractual restrictions on use of the properties, and we may be forced to spend substantial amounts to adapt the properties to other uses. Any such delays, limitations and expenses could adversely impact our ability to collect rent, obtain possession of leased properties or otherwise exercise remedies for tenant default and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Moreover, in connection with certain of our properties, we have entered into intercreditor agreements with the tenants’ lenders or tri-party agreements with our lenders. Our ability to exercise remedies under the applicable leases or management agreements or to reposition the applicable properties may be significantly delayed or limited by the terms of the intercreditor agreement or tri-party agreement. Any such delay or limit on our rights and remedies could adversely affect our ability to mitigate our losses and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Merger and acquisition activity or consolidation in the seniors housing and healthcare industries resulting in a change of control of, or a competitor’s investment in, one or more of our tenants, operators or managers could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The seniors housing and healthcare industries have recently experienced increased consolidation, including among owners of real estate and care providers. We compete with other healthcare REITs, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders, real estate partnerships, banks, insurance companies, private equity firms and other investors that pursue a variety of investments, which may include investments in our tenants, operators or managers. A competitor’s investment in one of our tenants, operators or managers could enable our competitor to influence that tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s business and strategy in a manner that impairs our relationship with the tenant, operator or manager or is otherwise adverse to our interests. Depending on our contractual agreements and the specific facts and circumstances, we may have the right to consent to, or otherwise exercise rights and remedies, including termination rights, on account of, a competitor’s investment in, a change of control of, or other transactions impacting a tenant, operator or manager. In deciding whether to exercise our rights and remedies, including termination rights, we assess numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations. In addition, in connection with any change of control of a tenant, operator or manager, the tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s management team may change, which could lead to a change in the tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s strategy or adversely affect the business of the tenant, operator or manager, either of which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Market conditions, including, but not limited to, interest rates and credit spreads, the availability of credit and the actual and perceived state of the real estate markets and public capital markets generally could negatively impact our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
The markets in which we operate are affected by a number of factors that are largely beyond our control but may nevertheless have a significant negative impact on us. These factors include, but are not limited to:
•
Interest rates and credit spreads;
•
The availability of credit, including the price, terms and conditions under which it can be obtained; and
•
The actual and perceived state of the real estate market, the market for dividend-paying stocks and public capital markets in general.
In addition, increased inflation may have a pronounced negative impact on the interest expense we pay in connection with our outstanding indebtedness and our general and administrative expenses, as these costs could increase at a rate higher than our rents.
Deflation may result in a decline in general price levels, often caused by a decrease in the supply of money or credit. The predominant effects of deflation are high unemployment, credit contraction and weakened consumer demand. Restricted lending practices may impact our ability to obtain financing for our properties, which could adversely impact our growth and profitability.
Our ongoing strategy depends, in part, upon future investments in and acquisitions of, or our development or redevelopment of, seniors housing and healthcare assets, and we may not be successful in identifying and consummating these transactions.
An important part of our business strategy is to continue to expand and diversify our portfolio through accretive acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment opportunities in domestic and international seniors housing and healthcare properties. Our execution of this strategy by successfully identifying, securing and consummating beneficial transactions is made more challenging by increased competition and can be affected by many factors, including our relationships with current and prospective clients, our ability to obtain debt and equity capital at costs comparable to or better than our competitors and lower than the yield we earn on our acquisitions or investments, and our ability to negotiate favorable terms with property owners seeking to sell and other contractual counterparties. Our competitors for these opportunities
25
include other healthcare REITs, real estate partnerships, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders and other investors, including developers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, government-sponsored entities and private equity firms, some of whom may have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we do. See “Business—Competition” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If we are unsuccessful at identifying and capitalizing on investment, acquisition, development and redevelopment opportunities, our growth and profitability may be adversely affected.
Investments in and acquisitions of seniors housing and healthcare properties entail risks associated with real estate investments generally, including risks that the investment will not achieve expected returns, that the cost estimates for necessary property improvements will prove inaccurate or that the tenant, operator or manager will fail to meet performance expectations. Investments outside the United States raise legal, economic and market risks associated with doing business in foreign countries, such as currency exchange fluctuations, costly regulatory requirements and foreign tax risks. Domestic and international real estate development and redevelopment projects present additional risks, including construction delays or cost overruns that increase expenses, the inability to obtain required zoning, occupancy and other governmental approvals and permits on a timely basis, and the incurrence of significant costs prior to completion of the project. Furthermore, healthcare properties are often highly customized and the development or redevelopment of such properties may require costly tenant-specific improvements. As a result, we cannot assure you that we will achieve the economic benefit we expect from acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment opportunities.
Our significant acquisition and investment activity presents certain risks to our business and operations.
We have made and expect to continue to make significant acquisitions and investments as part of our overall business strategy. Our significant acquisition and investment activity presents certain risks to our business and operations, including, among other things, that:
•
We may be unable to successfully integrate the operations, personnel or systems of acquired companies, maintain consistent standards, controls, policies and procedures, or realize the anticipated benefits of acquisitions and other investments within the anticipated time frame or at all;
•
We may be unable to effectively monitor and manage our expanded portfolio of properties, retain key employees or attract highly qualified new employees;
•
Projections of estimated future revenues, costs savings or operating metrics that we develop during the due diligence and integration planning process might be inaccurate;
•
Our leverage could increase or our per share financial results could decline if we incur additional debt or issue equity securities to finance acquisitions and investments;
•
Acquisitions and other new investments could divert management’s attention from our existing assets;
•
The value of acquired assets or the market price of our common stock may decline; and
•
We may be unable to continue paying dividends at the current rate.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to integrate acquisitions and investments without encountering difficulties or that any such difficulties will not have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If the liabilities we assume in connection with acquisitions, including indemnification obligations in favor of third parties, are greater than expected, or if there are unknown liabilities, our business could be materially and adversely affected.
We may assume or incur liabilities in connection with our acquisitions, including, in some cases, contingent liabilities. As we integrate these acquisitions, we may learn additional information about the sellers, the properties, their operations and their liabilities that adversely affects us, such as:
•
Liabilities relating to the clean-up or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions;
•
Unasserted claims of vendors or other persons dealing with the sellers;
•
Liabilities, claims and litigation, including indemnification obligations, whether or not incurred in the ordinary course of business, relating to periods prior to or following our acquisition;
•
Claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the sellers; and
•
Liabilities for taxes relating to periods prior to our acquisition.
As a result, we cannot assure you that our past or future acquisitions will be successful or will not, in fact, harm our business. Among other things, if the liabilities we assume in connection with acquisitions are greater than expected, or if we
26
discover obligations relating to the acquired properties or businesses of which we were not aware at the time of acquisition, our business and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
In addition, we have now, and may have in the future, certain surviving indemnification obligations in favor of third parties under the terms of acquisition agreements to which we are a party. Most of these indemnification obligations will be capped as to amount and survival period, and we do not believe that these obligations will be material in the aggregate. However, there can be no assurances as to the ultimate amount of such obligations or whether such obligations will have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our future results will suffer if we do not effectively manage the expansion of our hospital portfolio and operations following the acquisition of AHS.
As a result of our acquisition of AHS, we entered into the general acute care hospital sector. Part of our long-term business strategy involves expanding our hospital portfolio through additional acquisitions. Both the asset management of our existing general acute care hospital portfolio and such additional acquisitions may involve complex challenges. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to manage our expansion opportunities, integrate new investments into our existing business in an efficient and timely manner, successfully monitor the operations, costs, regulatory compliance and service quality of our operators and leverage our relationships with Ardent and other operators of hospitals. It is possible that our expansion or acquisition opportunities within the general acute care hospital sector will not be successful, which could adversely impact our growth and future results.
Our investments are concentrated in seniors housing and healthcare real estate, making us more vulnerable economically to adverse changes in the real estate market and the seniors housing and healthcare industries than if our investments were diversified.
We invest primarily in seniors housing and healthcare properties and are constrained by the terms of our existing indebtedness from making investments outside those industries. This investment focus exposes us to greater economic risk than if our portfolio were to include real estate assets in other industries or assets unrelated to real estate.
The healthcare industry is highly regulated, and changes in government regulation and reimbursement can have material adverse consequences on its participants, some of which may be unintended. The healthcare industry is also highly competitive, and our operators and managers may encounter increased competition for residents and patients, including with respect to the scope and quality of care and services provided, reputation and financial condition, physical appearance of the properties, price and location. If our tenants, operators and managers are unable to successfully compete with other operators and managers by maintaining profitable occupancy and rate levels, their ability to meet their respective obligations to us may be materially adversely affected. We cannot assure you that future changes in government regulation will not adversely affect the healthcare industry, including our seniors housing and healthcare operations, tenants and operators, nor can we be certain that our tenants, operators and managers will achieve and maintain occupancy and rate levels that will enable them to satisfy their obligations to us. Any adverse changes in the regulation of the healthcare industry or the competitiveness of our tenants, operators and managers could have a more pronounced effect on us than if we had investments outside the seniors housing and healthcare industries.
Real estate investments are relatively illiquid, and our ability to quickly sell or exchange our properties in response to changes in economic or other conditions is limited. In the event we market any of our properties for sale, the value of those properties and our ability to sell at prices or on terms acceptable to us could be adversely affected by a downturn in the real estate industry or any economic weakness in the seniors housing and healthcare industries. In addition, transfers of healthcare properties may be subject to regulatory approvals that are not required for transfers of other types of commercial properties. We cannot assure you that we will recognize the full value of any property that we sell for liquidity or other reasons, and the inability to respond quickly to changes in the performance of our investments could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our operating assets expose us to various operational risks, liabilities and claims that could adversely affect our ability to generate revenues or increase our costs and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our senior living operating assets and MOBs expose us to various operational risks, liabilities and claims that could increase our costs or adversely affect our ability to generate revenues, thereby reducing our profitability. These operational risks include fluctuations in occupancy levels, the inability to achieve economic resident fees (including anticipated increases in those fees), increases in the cost of food, materials, energy, labor (as a result of unionization or otherwise) or other services, rent control regulations, national and regional economic conditions, the imposition of new or increased taxes, capital expenditure requirements, professional and general liability claims, and the availability and cost of professional and general liability
27
insurance. Any one or a combination of these factors could result in operating deficiencies in our senior living operations or MOB operations reportable business segments, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our ownership of properties outside the United States exposes us to different risks than those associated with our domestic properties.
Our current or future ownership of properties outside the United States subjects us to risks that may be different or greater than those we face with our domestic properties. These risks include, but are not limited to:
•
Challenges with respect to repatriation of foreign earnings and cash;
•
Foreign ownership restrictions with respect to operations in countries in which we own properties;
•
Regional or country-specific business cycles and economic instability;
•
Challenges of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws and regulations, including those relating to real estate, corporate governance, operations, taxes, employment and legal proceedings;
•
Differences in lending practices and the willingness of domestic or foreign lenders to provide financing; and
•
Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations in the United States that affect foreign operations, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Increased construction and development in the markets in which our seniors housing communities and MOBs are located could adversely affect our future occupancy rates, operating margins and profitability.
Limited barriers to entry in the seniors housing and MOB industries could lead to the development of new seniors housing communities or MOBs that outpaces demand. In particular, data published by the National Investment Center for Seniors Housing & Care has indicated that seniors housing construction starts have been increasing and deliveries on seniors housing communities will accelerate in 2016, especially in certain geographic markets. If development outpaces demand for those assets in the markets in which our properties are located, those markets may become saturated and we could experience decreased occupancy, reduced operating margins and lower profitability, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
We have now, and may have in the future, exposure to contingent rent escalators, which could hinder our growth and profitability.
We derive a significant portion of our revenues from leasing properties pursuant to long-term triple-net leases that generally provide for fixed rental rates, subject to annual escalations. In certain cases, the annual escalations are contingent upon the achievement of specified revenue parameters or based on changes in CPI, with caps and floors. If, as a result of weak economic conditions or other factors, the properties subject to these leases do not generate sufficient revenue to achieve the specified rent escalation parameters or CPI does not increase, our growth and profitability may be hindered. If strong economic conditions result in significant increases in CPI, but the escalations under our leases are capped, our growth and profitability also may be limited.
We own certain properties subject to ground lease, air rights or other restrictive agreements that limit our uses of the properties, restrict our ability to sell or otherwise transfer the properties and expose us to loss of the properties if such agreements are breached by us or terminated.
Our investments in MOBs and other properties may be made through leasehold interests in the land on which the buildings are located, leases of air rights for the space above the land on which the buildings are located, or other similar restrictive arrangements. Many of these ground lease, air rights and other restrictive agreements impose significant limitations on our uses of the subject properties, restrict our ability to sell or otherwise transfer our interests in the properties or restrict the leasing of the properties. These restrictions may limit our ability to timely sell or exchange the properties, impair the properties’ value or negatively impact our ability to find suitable tenants for the properties. In addition, we could lose our interests in the subject properties if the ground lease, air rights or other restrictive agreements are breached by us or terminated.
We may be unable to successfully foreclose on the collateral securing our loans and other investments, and even if we are successful in our foreclosure efforts, we may be unable to successfully sell any acquired equity interests or reposition any acquired properties, which could adversely affect our ability to recover our investments.
If a borrower defaults under mortgage or other secured loans for which we are the lender, we may attempt to foreclose on the collateral securing those loans, including by acquiring any pledged equity interests or acquiring title to the subject properties, to protect our investment. In response, the defaulting borrower may contest our enforcement of foreclosure or other available remedies, seek bankruptcy protection against our exercise of enforcement or other available remedies, or bring claims against us for lender liability. If a defaulting borrower seeks bankruptcy protection, the automatic stay provisions of the U.S.
28
Bankruptcy Code would preclude us from enforcing foreclosure or other available remedies against the borrower unless relief is first obtained from the court with jurisdiction over the bankruptcy case. In addition, we may be subject to intercreditor or tri-party agreements that delay, impact, govern or limit our ability to foreclose on a lien securing a loan or otherwise delay or limit our pursuit of our rights and remedies. Any such delay or limit on our ability to pursue our rights or remedies could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Even if we successfully foreclose on the collateral securing our mortgage loans and other investments, costs related to enforcement of our remedies, high loan-to-value ratios or declines in the value of the collateral could prevent us from realizing the full amount of our secured loans, and we could be required to record a valuation allowance for such losses. Moreover, the collateral may include equity interests that we are unable to sell due to securities law restrictions or otherwise, or properties that we are unable to reposition with new tenants or operators on a timely basis, if at all, or without making improvements or repairs. Any delay or costs incurred in selling or repositioning acquired collateral could adversely affect our ability to recover our investments.
Some of our loan investments are subordinated to loans held by third parties.
Our mezzanine loan investments are subordinated to senior secured loans held by other investors that encumber the same real estate. If a senior secured loan is foreclosed, that foreclosure would extinguish our rights in the collateral for our mezzanine loan. In order to protect our economic interest in that collateral, we would need to be prepared, on an expedited basis, to advance funds to the senior lenders in order to cure defaults under the senior secured loans and prevent such a foreclosure. If a senior secured loan has matured or has been accelerated, then in order to protect our economic interest in the collateral, we would need to be prepared, on an expedited basis, to purchase or pay off that senior secured loan, which could require an infusion of fresh capital as large or larger than our initial investment. Our ability to sell or syndicate a mezzanine loan could be limited by transfer restrictions in the intercreditor agreement with the senior secured lenders. Our ability to negotiate modifications to the mezzanine loan documents with our borrowers could be limited by restrictions on modifications in the intercreditor agreement. Since mezzanine loans are typically secured by pledges of equity rather than direct liens on real estate, our mezzanine loan investments are more vulnerable than our mortgage loan investments to losses caused by competing creditor claims, unauthorized transfers, or bankruptcies.
Our tenants, operators and managers may be adversely affected by healthcare regulation and enforcement.
Regulation of the long-term healthcare industry generally has intensified over time both in the number and type of regulations and in the efforts to enforce those regulations. This is particularly true for large for-profit, multi-facility providers like Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent. Federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting the healthcare industry include those relating to, among other things, licensure, conduct of operations, ownership of facilities, addition of facilities and equipment, allowable costs, services, prices for services, qualified beneficiaries, quality of care, patient rights, fraudulent or abusive behavior, and financial and other arrangements that may be entered into by healthcare providers. In addition, changes in enforcement policies by federal and state governments have resulted in an increase in the number of inspections, citations of regulatory deficiencies and other regulatory sanctions, including terminations from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, bars on Medicare and Medicaid payments for new admissions, civil monetary penalties and even criminal penalties. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We are unable to predict the scope of future federal, state and local regulations and legislation, including the Medicare and Medicaid statutes and regulations, or the intensity of enforcement efforts with respect to such regulations and legislation, and any changes in the regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on our tenants, operators and managers, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If our tenants, operators and managers fail to comply with the extensive laws, regulations and other requirements applicable to their businesses and the operation of our properties, they could become ineligible to receive reimbursement from governmental and private third-party payor programs, face bans on admissions of new patients or residents, suffer civil or criminal penalties or be required to make significant changes to their operations. Our tenants, operators and managers also could face increased costs related to healthcare regulation, such as the Affordable Care Act, or be forced to expend considerable resources in responding to an investigation or other enforcement action under applicable laws or regulations. In such event, the results of operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers and the results of operations of our properties operated or managed by those entities could be adversely affected, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
29
Changes in the reimbursement rates or methods of payment from third-party payors, including insurance companies and the Medicare and Medicaid programs, could have a material adverse effect on certain of our tenants and operators and on us.
Certain of our tenants and operators rely on reimbursement from third-party payors, including the Medicare (both traditional Medicare and "managed" Medicare/Medicare Advantage) and Medicaid programs, for substantially all of their revenues. Federal and state legislators and regulators have adopted or proposed various cost-containment measures that would limit payments to healthcare providers, and budget crises and financial shortfalls have caused states to implement or consider Medicaid rate freezes or cuts. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Private third-party payors also have continued their efforts to control healthcare costs. We cannot assure you that our tenants and operators who currently depend on governmental or private payor reimbursement will be adequately reimbursed for the services they provide. Significant limits by governmental and private third-party payors on the scope of services reimbursed or on reimbursement rates and fees, whether from legislation, administrative actions or private payor efforts, could have a material adverse effect on the liquidity, financial condition and results of operations of certain of our tenants and operators, which could affect adversely their ability to comply with the terms of our leases and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The healthcare industry trend away from a traditional fee for service reimbursement model towards value-based payment approaches may negatively impact certain of our tenants’ revenues and profitability
Certain of our tenants, specifically those providers in the post-acute and general acute care hospital space, are subject to the broad trend in the healthcare industry toward value-based purchasing of healthcare 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. Medicare and Medicaid require healthcare facilities, including hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, 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 payors currently require healthcare facilities to report quality data, and several commercial payors do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse events.
Recently, HHS indicated that it is particularly focused on tying Medicare payments to quality or value through alternative payment models, which generally aim to make providers attentive to the total costs of treatment. Examples of alternative payment models include bundled-payment arrangements. It is unclear whether such models will successfully coordinate care and reduce costs or whether they will decrease reimbursement. The value-based purchasing trend is not limited to the public sector. Several of the nation’s largest commercial payors have also expressed an intent to increase reliance on value-based reimbursement arrangements. Further, many large commercial payors require hospitals to report quality data, and several commercial payors do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse events.
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 the revenues and profitability of those of our tenants who are providers of healthcare services; however, if this trend significantly and adversely affects their profitability, it could in turn negatively affect their ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us and or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If controls imposed on certain of our tenants who provide healthcare services that are reimbursed by Medicare, Medicaid and other third-party payors to reduce admissions and length of stay affect inpatient volumes at our healthcare facilities, the financial condition or results of operations of those tenants could be adversely affected.
Controls imposed by Medicare, Medicaid and commercial third-party payors designed to reduce admissions and lengths of stay, commonly referred to as “utilization reviews,” have affected and are expected to continue to affect certain of our healthcare facilities, specifically our acute care hospitals and post-acute facilities. Utilization review entails the review of the admission and course of treatment of a patient by managed care plans. Inpatient utilization, average lengths of stay and occupancy rates continue to be negatively affected by payor-required preadmission authorization and utilization review and by payor pressures to maximize outpatient and alternative healthcare delivery services for less acutely ill patients. Efforts to impose more stringent cost controls and reductions are expected to continue, which could negatively impact the financial condition of our tenants who provide healthcare services in our hospitals and post-acute facilities. If so, this could adversely affect these tenants’ ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us and or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
30
The implementation of new patient criteria for LTACs will change the basis upon which certain of our tenants are reimbursed by Medicare, which could adversely affect those tenants’ revenues and profitability.
As part of the Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013 enacted on December 26, 2013, Congress adopted various legislative changes impacting LTACs. These legislative changes create new Medicare criteria and payment rules for LTACs, and could have a material adverse impact on the revenues and profitability of the tenants of our LTACs. This material adverse impact could, in turn, negatively affect those tenants’ ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their affiliated health systems could fail to remain competitive or financially viable, which could adversely impact their ability to attract physicians and physician groups to our MOBs.
Our MOB operations depend on the competitiveness and financial viability of the hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their ability to attract physicians and other healthcare-related clients to our MOBs. The viability of these hospitals, in turn, depends on factors such as the quality and mix of healthcare services provided, competition for patients, physicians and physician groups, demographic trends in the surrounding community, market position and growth potential, as well as the ability of the affiliated health systems to provide economies of scale and access to capital. If a hospital on or near whose campus one of our MOBs is located fails or becomes unable to meet its financial obligations, and if an affiliated health system is unable to support that hospital, the hospital may be unable to compete successfully or could be forced to close or relocate, which could adversely impact its ability to attract physicians and other healthcare-related clients. Because we rely on proximity to and affiliations with hospitals to create leasing demand in our MOBs, a hospital’s inability to remain competitive or financially viable, or to attract physicians and physician groups, could materially adversely affect our MOB operations and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken through our joint ventures, may not yield anticipated returns.
We consider and, when appropriate, invest in various development and redevelopment projects. In deciding whether to make an investment in a particular project, we make certain assumptions regarding the expected future performance of the property. Our assumptions are subject to risks generally associated with development and redevelopment projects, including, among others, that:
•
We may be unable to obtain financing for the project on favorable terms or at all;
•
We may not complete the project on schedule or within budgeted amounts;
•
We may encounter delays in obtaining or fail to obtain all necessary zoning, land use, building, occupancy, environmental and other governmental permits and authorizations, or underestimate the costs necessary to develop or redevelop the property to market standards;
•
Construction or other delays may provide tenants or residents the right to terminate preconstruction leases or cause us to incur additional costs;
•
Volatility in the price of construction materials or labor may increase our project costs;
•
In the case of our MOB developments, hospitals or health systems may maintain significant decision-making authority with respect to the development schedule;
•
Our builders may fail to perform or satisfy the expectations of our clients or prospective clients;
•
We may incorrectly forecast risks associated with development in new geographic regions;
•
Tenants may not lease space at the quantity or rental rate levels or on the schedule projected;
•
Demand for our project may decrease prior to completion, including due to competition from other developments; and
•
Lease rates and rents at newly developed or redeveloped properties may fluctuate based on factors beyond our control, including market and economic conditions.
If any of the risks described above occur, our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken through our joint ventures, may not yield anticipated returns, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
31
Our investments in joint ventures and unconsolidated entities could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on our joint venture partners’ financial condition, any disputes that may arise between us and our joint venture partners, and our exposure to potential losses from the actions of our joint venture partners.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned
34
MOBs,
15
seniors housing communities and
one
LTAC through consolidated joint ventures, and we had ownership interests ranging between
5%
and
25%
in
seven
MOBs,
20
seniors housing communities and
14
skilled nursing facilities through investments in unconsolidated entities. In addition, we had a 34% ownership interest in Atria and a 9.9% interest in Ardent as of
December 31, 2015
. These joint ventures and unconsolidated entities involve risks not present with respect to our wholly owned properties, including the following:
•
We may be unable to take actions that are opposed by our joint venture partners under arrangements that require us to share decision-making authority over major decisions affecting the ownership or operation of the joint venture and any property owned by the joint venture, such as the sale or financing of the property or the making of additional capital contributions for the benefit of the property;
•
For joint ventures in which we have a noncontrolling interest, our joint venture partners may take actions that we oppose;
•
Our ability to sell or transfer our interest in a joint venture to a third party may be restricted if we fail to obtain the prior consent of our joint venture partners;
•
Our joint venture partners may become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions, which could delay construction or development of a property or increase our financial commitment to the joint venture;
•
Our joint venture partners may have business interests or goals with respect to a property that conflict with our business interests and goals, including with respect to the timing, terms and strategies for investment, which could increase the likelihood of disputes regarding the ownership, management or disposition of the property;
•
Disagreements with our joint venture partners could result in litigation or arbitration that increases our expenses, distracts our officers and directors, and disrupts the day-to-day operations of the property, including by delaying important decisions until the dispute is resolved; and
•
We may suffer losses as a result of actions taken by our joint venture partners with respect to our joint venture investments.
Events that adversely affect the ability of seniors and their families to afford daily resident fees at our seniors housing communities could cause our occupancy rates, resident fee revenues and results of operations to decline.
Assisted and independent living services generally are not reimbursable under government reimbursement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. A large majority of the resident fee revenues generated by our senior living operations, therefore, are derived from private pay sources consisting of the income or assets of residents or their family members. In light of the significant expense associated with building new properties and staffing and other costs of providing services, typically only seniors with income or assets that meet or exceed the comparable region median can afford the daily resident and care fees at our seniors housing communities, and a weak economy, depressed housing market or changes in demographics could adversely affect their continued ability to do so. If the managers of our seniors housing communities are unable to attract and retain seniors that have sufficient income, assets or other resources to pay the fees associated with assisted and independent living services, the occupancy rates, resident fee revenues and results of operations of our senior living operations could decline, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The amount and scope of insurance coverage provided by our policies and policies maintained by our tenants, operators and managers may not adequately insure against losses.
We maintain or require in our lease, management and other agreements that our tenants, operators and managers maintain all applicable lines of insurance on our properties and their operations. Although we regularly review the amount and scope of insurance provided by our policies and required to be maintained by our tenants, operators and managers and believe the coverage provided to be customary for similarly situated companies in our industry, we cannot assure you that we or our tenants, operators and managers will continue to be able to maintain adequate levels of insurance. We also cannot assure you that we or our tenants, operators and managers will maintain the required coverages, that we will continue to require the same levels of insurance under our lease, management and other agreements, that such insurance will be available at a reasonable cost in the future or that the policies maintained will fully cover all losses on our properties upon the occurrence of a catastrophic event, nor can we make any guaranty as to the future financial viability of the insurers that underwrite our policies and the policies maintained by our tenants, operators and managers.
32
For various reasons, including to reduce and manage costs, many healthcare companies utilize different organizational and corporate structures coupled with self-insurance trusts or captive programs that may provide less insurance coverage than a traditional insurance policy. Companies that insure any part of their general and professional liability risks through their own captive limited purpose entities generally estimate the future cost of general and professional liability through actuarial studies that rely primarily on historical data. However, due to the rise in the number and severity of professional claims against healthcare providers, these actuarial studies may underestimate the future cost of claims, and reserves for future claims may not be adequate to cover the actual cost of those claims. As a result, the tenants and operators of our properties who self-insure could incur large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses, which could materially adversely affect their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and, in turn, their ability to satisfy their obligations to us. If we or the managers of our senior living operations decide to implement a captive or self-insurance program, any large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses incurred could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Should an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occur, we could incur substantial liability or lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenues from the property. Following the occurrence of such an event, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property. We cannot assure you that material uninsured losses, or losses in excess of insurance proceeds, will not occur in the future.
Significant legal actions or regulatory proceedings could subject us or our tenants, operators and managers to increased operating costs and substantial uninsured liabilities, which could materially adversely affect our or their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.
From time to time, we may be subject to claims brought against us in lawsuits and other legal or regulatory proceedings arising out of our alleged actions or the alleged actions of our tenants, operators and managers for which such tenants, operators and managers may have agreed to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless. An unfavorable resolution of any such litigation or proceeding could materially adversely affect our or their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
In certain cases, we and our tenants, operators and managers may be subject to professional liability claims brought by plaintiffs’ attorneys seeking significant punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. Due to the historically high frequency and severity of professional liability claims against seniors housing and healthcare providers, the availability of professional liability insurance has decreased and the premiums on such insurance coverage remain costly. As a result, insurance protection against such claims may not be sufficient to cover all claims against us or our tenants, operators or managers, and may not be available at a reasonable cost. If we or our tenants, operators and managers are unable to maintain adequate insurance coverage or are required to pay punitive damages, we or they may be exposed to substantial liabilities.
The occurrence of cyber incidents could disrupt our operations, result in the loss of confidential information and/or damage our business relationships and reputation.
As our reliance on technology has increased, our business is subject to greater risk from cyber incidents, including attempts to gain unauthorized access to our or our managers’ systems to disrupt operations, corrupt data or steal confidential information, and other electronic security breaches. While we and our managers have implemented measures to help mitigate these threats, such measures cannot guarantee that we will be successful in preventing a cyber incident. The occurrence of a cyber incident could disrupt our operations, or the operations of our managers, compromise the confidential information of our employees or the residents in our seniors housing communities, and/or damage our business relationships and reputation.
Reductions in federal government spending, tax reform initiatives or other federal legislation to address the federal government’s projected operating deficit could have a material adverse effect on our operators’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations.
President Obama and members of the U.S. Congress have approved or proposed various spending cuts and tax reform initiatives that have resulted or could result in changes (including substantial reductions in funding) to Medicare, Medicaid or Medicare Advantage Plans. Any such existing or future federal legislation relating to deficit reduction that reduces reimbursement payments to healthcare providers could have a material adverse effect on certain of our operators’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations, which could adversely affect their ability to satisfy their obligations to us and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our operators may be sued under a federal whistleblower statute.
Our operators who engage in business with the federal government may be sued under a federal whistleblower statute designed to combat fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These lawsuits can involve significant monetary damages and award
33
bounties to private plaintiffs who successfully bring these suits. If any of these lawsuits were brought against our operators, such suits combined with increased operating costs and substantial uninsured liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our operators’ liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and on their ability to satisfy their obligations under our leases, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
We could incur substantial liabilities and costs if any of our properties are found to be contaminated with hazardous substances or we become involved in any environmental disputes.
Under federal and state environmental laws and regulations, a current or former owner of real property may be liable for costs related to the investigation, removal and remediation of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum that are released from or are present at or under, or that are disposed of in connection with such property. Owners of real property may also face other environmental liabilities, including government fines and penalties imposed by regulatory authorities and damages for injuries to persons, property or natural resources. Environmental laws and regulations often impose liability without regard to whether the owner was aware of, or was responsible for, the presence, release or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum. In certain circumstances, environmental liability may result from the activities of a current or former operator of the property. Although we generally have indemnification rights against the current operators of our properties for contamination caused by them, such indemnification may not adequately cover all environmental costs. See “Governmental Regulation—Environmental Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our success depends, in part, on our ability to attract and retain talented employees, and the loss of any one of our key personnel could adversely impact our business.
The success of our business depends, in part, on the leadership and performance of our executive management team and key employees, and our ability to attract, retain and motivate talented employees could significantly impact our future performance. Competition for these individuals is intense, and we cannot assure you that we will retain our key officers and employees or that we will be able to attract and retain other highly qualified individuals in the future. Losing any one or more of these persons could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Failure to maintain effective internal controls could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to provide a report by management on internal control over financial reporting, including management’s assessment of the effectiveness of such control. Because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls, or fraud, effective internal controls over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatement and can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls over financial reporting and our operating internal controls, including any failure to implement required new or improved controls as a result of changes to our business or otherwise, or if we experience difficulties in their implementation, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely harmed and we could fail to meet our reporting obligations.
Economic and other conditions that negatively affect geographic locations to which a greater percentage of our NOI is attributed could adversely affect our financial results.
For the year ended
December 31, 2015
, approximately
37.7%
of our total NOI (excluding amounts in discontinued operations) was derived from properties located in
California
(
14.7%
),
Texas
(
6.7%
),
New York
(
6.0%
),
Illinois
(
5.5%
), and
Florida
(
4.8%
). As a result, we are subject to increased exposure to adverse conditions affecting these regions, including downturns in the local economies or changes in local real estate conditions, increased construction and competition or decreased demand for our properties, regional climate events and changes in state-specific legislation, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
We may be adversely affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates.
Our ownership of properties in Canada and the United Kingdom currently subjects us to fluctuations in the exchange rates between U.S. dollars and Canadian dollars or the British pound, which may, from time to time, impact our financial condition and results of operations. If we continue to expand our international presence through investments in, or acquisitions or development of, seniors housing or healthcare assets outside the United States, Canada or the United Kingdom, we may transact business in other foreign currencies. Although we may pursue hedging alternatives, including borrowing in local currencies, to protect against foreign currency fluctuations, we cannot assure you that such fluctuations will not have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
34
Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure
We may become more leveraged.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had approximately
$11.2 billion
of outstanding indebtedness. The instruments governing our existing indebtedness permit us to incur substantial additional debt, including secured debt, and we may satisfy our capital and liquidity needs through additional borrowings. A high level of indebtedness would require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to the payment of debt service, thereby reducing the funds available to implement our business strategy and make distributions to stockholders. A high level of indebtedness could also have the following consequences:
•
Potential limits on our ability to adjust rapidly to changing market conditions and vulnerability in the event of a downturn in general economic conditions or in the real estate or healthcare industries;
•
Potential impairment of our ability to obtain additional financing to execute on our business strategy; and
•
Potential downgrade in the rating of our debt securities by one or more rating agencies, which could have the effect of, among other things, limiting our access to capital and increasing our cost of borrowing.
In addition, from time to time, we mortgage certain of our properties to secure payment of indebtedness. If we are unable to meet our mortgage payments, then the encumbered properties could be foreclosed upon or transferred to the mortgagee with a resulting loss of income and asset value.
We are exposed to increases in interest rates, which could reduce our profitability and adversely impact our ability to refinance existing debt, sell assets or engage in acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment activity, and our decision to hedge against interest rate risk might not be effective.
We receive a significant portion of our revenues by leasing assets under long-term triple-net leases that generally provide for fixed rental rates subject to annual escalations, while certain of our debt obligations are floating rate obligations with interest and related payments that vary with the movement of LIBOR, Bankers’ Acceptance or other indexes. The generally fixed rate nature of a significant portion of our revenues and the variable rate nature of certain of our debt obligations create interest rate risk. Although our operating assets provide a partial hedge against interest rate fluctuations, if interest rates rise, the costs of our existing floating rate debt and any new debt that we incur would increase. These increased costs could reduce our profitability, impair our ability to meet our debt obligations, or increase the cost of financing our acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment activity. An increase in interest rates also could limit our ability to refinance existing debt upon maturity or cause us to pay higher rates upon refinancing, as well as decrease the amount that third parties are willing to pay for our assets, thereby limiting our ability to promptly reposition our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions.
We may seek to manage our exposure to interest rate volatility with hedging arrangements that involve additional risks, including the risks that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements, that these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to interest rate changes, that the amount of income we earn from hedging transactions may be limited by federal tax provisions governing REITs, and that these arrangements may cause us to pay higher interest rates on our debt obligations than otherwise would be the case. Moreover, no amount of hedging activity can fully insulate us from the risks associated with changes in interest rates. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate risk, if we choose to engage in such activities, could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to raise the capital necessary to meet our debt service obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy, if our cash flow from operations is insufficient to satisfy these needs, and the failure to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Although we believe that we have sufficient access to capital and other sources of funding to meet our expected liquidity needs, we cannot assure you that conditions in the capital markets will not deteriorate or that our access to capital and other sources of funding will not become constrained, which could adversely affect the availability and terms of future borrowings, renewals or refinancings and our results of operation and financial condition. If we cannot access capital at an acceptable cost or at all, we may be required to liquidate one or more investments in properties at times that may not permit us to maximize the return on those investments or that could result in adverse tax consequences to us.
As a public company, our access to debt and equity capital depends, in part, on the trading prices of our senior notes and common stock, which, in turn, depend upon market conditions that change from time to time, such as the market’s perception
35
of our financial condition, our growth potential and our current and expected future earnings and cash distributions. Our failure to meet the market’s expectation with regard to future earnings and cash distributions or a significant downgrade in the ratings assigned to our long-term debt could impact our ability to access capital or increase our borrowing costs. We also rely on the financial institutions that are parties to our unsecured revolving credit facility. If these institutions become capital constrained, tighten their lending standards or become insolvent or if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests from other borrowers within a short period of time, they may be unable or unwilling to honor their funding commitments to us, which would adversely affect our ability to draw on our unsecured revolving credit facility and, over time, could negatively impact our ability to consummate acquisitions, repay indebtedness as it matures, fund capital expenditures or make distributions to our stockholders.
Covenants in the instruments governing our existing indebtedness limit our operational flexibility, and a covenant breach could materially adversely affect our operations.
The terms of the instruments governing our existing indebtedness require us to comply with certain customary financial and other covenants, such as maintaining debt service coverage, leverage ratios and minimum net worth requirements. Our continued ability to incur additional debt and to conduct business in general is subject to our compliance with these covenants, which limit our operational flexibility. Breaches of these covenants could result in defaults under the applicable debt instruments and could trigger defaults under any of our other indebtedness that is cross-defaulted against such instruments, even if we satisfy our payment obligations. Financial and other covenants that limit our operational flexibility, as well as defaults resulting from our breach of any of these covenants, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Risks Arising from Our Status as a REIT
Loss of our status as a REIT would have significant adverse consequences for us and the value of our common stock.
If we lose our status as a REIT (currently or with respect to any tax years for which the statute of limitations has not expired), we will face serious tax consequences that will substantially reduce the funds available to satisfy our obligations, to implement our business strategy and to make distributions to our stockholders for each of the years involved because:
•
We would not be allowed a deduction for distributions to stockholders in computing our taxable income and would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates;
•
We could be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax and increased state and local taxes; and
•
Unless we are entitled to relief under statutory provisions, we could not elect to be subject to tax as a REIT for four taxable years following the year during which we were disqualified.
In addition, in such event we would no longer be required to pay dividends to maintain REIT status, which could adversely affect the value of our common stock.
Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The determination of factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control, as well as new legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions, may adversely affect our investors or our ability to remain qualified as a REIT for tax purposes. Although we believe that we currently qualify as a REIT, we cannot assure you that we will continue to qualify for all future periods.
The 90% distribution requirement will decrease our liquidity and may limit our ability to engage in otherwise beneficial transactions.
To comply with the 90% distribution requirement applicable to REITs and to avoid the nondeductible excise tax, we must make distributions to our stockholders. See “Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Requirements for Qualification as a REIT—Annual Distribution Requirements” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Such distributions reduce the funds we have available to finance our investment, acquisition, development and redevelopment activity and may limit our ability to engage in transactions that are otherwise in the best interests of our stockholders.
Although we do not anticipate any inability to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement, from time to time, we may not have sufficient cash or other liquid assets to do so. For example, timing differences between the actual receipt of income and actual payment of deductible expenses, on the one hand, and the inclusion of that income and deduction of those expenses in arriving at our taxable income, on the other hand, or non-deductible expenses such as principal amortization or repayments or capital expenditures in excess of non-cash deductions may prevent us from having sufficient cash or liquid assets to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement.
In the event that timing differences occur or we decide to retain cash or to distribute such greater amount as may be necessary to avoid income and excise taxation, we may seek to borrow funds, issue additional equity securities, pay taxable
36
stock dividends, distribute other property or securities or engage in a transaction intended to enable us to meet the REIT distribution requirements. Any of these actions may require us to raise additional capital to meet our obligations; however, see “—Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure—Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy.” The terms of the instruments governing our existing indebtedness restrict our ability to engage in certain of these transactions.
To preserve our qualification as a REIT, our certificate of incorporation contains ownership limits with respect to our capital stock that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control of our company.
To assist us in preserving our qualification as a REIT, our certificate of incorporation provides that if a person acquires beneficial ownership of more than 9.0% of our outstanding common stock or more than 9.9% of our outstanding preferred stock, the shares that are beneficially owned in excess of the applicable limit are considered “excess shares” and are automatically deemed transferred to a trust for the benefit of a charitable institution or other qualifying organization selected by our Board of Directors. The trust is entitled to all dividends with respect to the excess shares and the trustee may exercise all voting power over the excess shares. In addition, we have the right to purchase the excess shares for a price equal to the lesser of (i) the price per share in the transaction that created the excess shares or (ii) the market price on the day we purchase the shares, but if we do not purchase the excess shares, the trustee of the trust is required to transfer the shares at the direction of our Board of Directors. These ownership limits could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or might otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.
ITEM 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
ITEM 2.
Properties
Seniors Housing and Healthcare Properties
As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned approximately
1,300
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, MOBs, skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals, and we had
four
properties under development. We believe that maintaining a balanced portfolio of high-quality assets diversified by investment type, geographic location, asset type, tenant/operator, revenue source and operating model makes us less susceptible to single-state regulatory or reimbursement changes, regional climate events and local economic downturns and diminishes the risk that any single factor or event could materially harm our business.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$2.0 billion
aggregate principal amount of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding, secured by
157
of our properties. Excluding those portions attributed to our joint venture and operating partners, our share of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding was
$1.9 billion
.
37
The following table provides additional information regarding the geographic diversification of our portfolio of properties as of
December 31, 2015
(including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities, but excluding properties classified as held for sale):
Seniors Housing
Communities
Skilled Nursing
Facilities
MOBs
Specialty Hospitals
General Acute Care
Geographic Location
Number of
Properties
Units
Number of Properties
Licensed
Beds
Number of Properties
Square Feet
Number of Properties
Licensed Beds
Number of Properties
Licensed Beds
Alabama
6
371
—
—
4
468,887
—
—
—
—
Arizona
28
2,608
—
—
13
829,451
3
169
—
—
Arkansas
4
262
—
—
1
4,596
—
—
—
—
California
86
9,650
4
483
25
2,126,221
6
503
—
—
Colorado
19
1,723
2
190
13
890,907
1
68
—
—
Connecticut
14
1,623
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
District of Columbia
—
—
—
—
2
101,580
—
—
—
—
Florida
51
4,772
—
—
19
583,081
6
511
—
—
Georgia
20
1,743
1
162
19
1,495,644
—
—
—
—
Idaho
1
70
6
513
—
—
—
—
—
—
Illinois
25
2,938
1
82
37
1,543,686
4
430
—
—
Indiana
11
964
8
1,109
22
1,556,964
1
59
—
—
Kansas
9
540
—
—
1
32,540
—
—
—
—
Kentucky
10
919
3
377
4
172,977
1
384
—
—
Louisiana
1
58
—
—
5
361,372
1
168
—
—
Maine
6
445
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Maryland
5
360
—
—
2
82,663
—
—
—
—
Massachusetts
19
2,104
9
1,045
—
—
2
109
—
—
Michigan
24
1,560
—
—
14
599,339
—
—
—
—
Minnesota
18
1,017
—
—
5
353,200
—
—
—
—
Mississippi
—
—
—
—
1
50,575
—
—
—
—
Missouri
2
153
—
—
20
1,096,009
2
227
—
—
Montana
2
209
2
276
—
—
—
—
—
—
Nebraska
1
135
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Nevada
4
462
—
—
5
415,629
1
52
—
—
New Hampshire
1
125
1
290
—
—
—
—
—
—
New Jersey
13
1,184
1
153
3
36,664
—
—
—
—
New Mexico
5
589
—
—
—
—
2
123
4
544
New York
42
4,630
—
—
4
243,535
—
—
—
—
North Carolina
23
2,242
3
297
20
759,422
1
124
—
—
North Dakota
2
115
—
—
1
114,000
—
—
—
—
Ohio
22
1,417
6
907
28
1,221,287
1
50
—
—
Oklahoma
8
463
—
—
—
—
1
59
4
924
Oregon
29
2,574
—
—
1
105,375
—
—
—
—
Pennsylvania
32
2,455
4
620
10
877,878
2
115
—
—
Rhode Island
6
596
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
South Carolina
5
388
—
—
20
1,103,828
—
—
—
—
South Dakota
4
182
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Tennessee
18
1,467
—
—
11
404,511
1
49
—
—
Texas
52
4,014
—
—
22
1,330,987
10
657
1
445
Utah
3
321
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Vermont
—
—
1
144
—
—
—
—
—
—
Virginia
8
658
3
432
5
231,463
—
—
—
—
Washington
25
2,441
8
737
10
578,975
—
—
—
—
West Virginia
2
117
4
326
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wisconsin
69
2,958
—
—
21
1,104,558
—
—
—
—
Wyoming
2
168
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Total U.S.
737
63,790
67
8,143
368
20,877,804
46
3,857
9
1,913
Canada
41
4,493
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
United Kingdom
10
663
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
121
Total
788
68,946
67
8,143
368
20,877,804
46
3,857
12
2,034
38
Corporate Offices
Our headquarters are located in Chicago, Illinois, and we have additional corporate offices in: Louisville, Kentucky; Plano, Texas; and Irvine, California. We lease all of our corporate offices.
ITEM 3.
Legal Proceedings
The information contained in “Note 16—Litigation” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference into this Item 3. Except as set forth therein, we are not a party to, nor is any of our property the subject of, any material pending legal proceedings.
As previously disclosed, in July 2014, we voluntarily contacted the SEC to advise it of the determination by our former registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP (“EY”), that it was not independent of us due solely to an inappropriate personal relationship between an EY partner, who until June 30, 2014 was the lead audit partner on our 2014 audit and quarterly review and was previously an audit engagement partner on our 2013 and 2012 audits, and an individual in a financial reporting oversight role at our company. We have cooperated with the SEC and intend to continue to do so with respect to its inquiries related to this matter. At this time, the matter is ongoing and we cannot reasonably assess its timing or outcome.
ITEM 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.
PART II
ITEM 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information
Our common stock, par value $0.25 per share, is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) under the symbol “VTR.” The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported on the NYSE and the dividends declared per share.
Sales Price of
Common Stock
Dividends
Declared
High
Low
2014
First Quarter
$
63.67
$
56.79
$
0.725
Second Quarter
68.40
61.29
0.725
Third Quarter
66.04
60.70
0.725
Fourth Quarter
74.44
62.48
0.79
2015
First Quarter
$
80.95
$
69.12
$
0.79
Second Quarter
76.90
61.82
0.79
Third Quarter
68.52
52.66
0.73
Fourth Quarter
58.38
49.68
0.73
As of
February 10, 2016
, we had
336,070,352
shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately
5,102
stockholders of record.
Dividends and Distributions
We pay regular quarterly dividends to holders of our common stock to comply with the provisions of the Code governing REITs. On
February 12, 2016
, our Board of Directors declared the first quarterly installment of our
2016
dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.73 per share, payable in cash on
March 31, 2016
to stockholders of record on
March 7, 2015
. We expect to distribute at least 100% of our taxable net income, after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards, to our stockholders for
2016
. See “Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Requirements for Qualification as a REIT—Annual Distribution Requirements” included in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
39
In general, our Board of Directors makes decisions regarding the nature, frequency and amount of our dividends on a quarterly basis. Because the Board considers many factors when making these decisions, including our present and future liquidity needs, our current and projected financial condition and results of operations and the performance and credit quality of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers, we cannot assure you that we will maintain the practice of paying regular quarterly dividends to continue to qualify as a REIT. Please see “Cautionary Statements” and the risk factors included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a description of other factors that may affect our distribution policy.
Prior to its suspension in July 2014, our stockholders were entitled to reinvest all or a portion of any cash distribution on their shares of our common stock by participating in our Distribution Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan (“DRIP”), subject to the terms of the plan. See “Note 17—Permanent and Temporary Equity” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We may determine whether or not to reinstate the DRIP at any time, in our sole discretion.
Director and Employee Stock Sales
Certain of our directors, executive officers and other employees have adopted and, from time to time in the future, may adopt non-discretionary, written trading plans that comply with Rule 10b5-1 under the Exchange Act, or otherwise monetize, gift or transfer their equity-based compensation. These transactions typically are conducted for estate, tax and financial planning purposes and are subject to compliance with our Amended and Restated Securities Trading Policy and Procedures (“Securities Trading Policy”), the minimum stock ownership requirements contained in our Guidelines on Governance and all applicable laws and regulations.
Our Securities Trading Policy expressly prohibits our directors, executive officers and employees from buying or selling derivatives with respect to our securities or other financial instruments that are designed to hedge or offset a decrease in the market value of our securities and from engaging in short sales with respect to our securities. In addition, our Securities Trading Policy prohibits our directors and executive officers from holding our securities in margin accounts or pledging our securities to secure loans without the prior approval of our Audit and Compliance Committee. Each of our executive officers has advised us that he or she is in compliance with the Securities Trading Policy and has not pledged any of our equity securities to secure margin or other loans.
Stock Repurchases
The table below summarizes repurchases of our common stock made during the quarter ended
December 31, 2015
:
Number of Shares
Repurchased (1)
Average Price
Per Share
October 1 through October 31
—
$
—
November 1 through November 30
1,023
$
49.68
December 1 through December 31
164
$
56.43
(1)
Repurchases represent shares withheld to pay taxes on the vesting of restricted stock granted to employees under our 2006 Incentive Plan or 2012 Incentive Plan or restricted stock units granted to employees under the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. (“NHP”) 2005 Performance Incentive Plan and assumed by us in connection with our acquisition of NHP. The value of the shares withheld is the closing price of our common stock on the date the vesting or exercise occurred (or, if not a trading day, the immediately preceding trading day) or the fair market value of our common stock at the time of the exercise, as the case may be.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
On January 16, 2015, in connection with our acquisition of HCT, each of the 7,057,271 issued and outstanding limited partnership units of American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. (subsequently renamed Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.), a limited partnership in which HCT was the sole general partner prior to the acquisition, was converted into a newly created class of limited partnership units (“Class C Units”) at the 0.1688 exchange ratio payable to HCT stockholders in the acquisition, net of any Class C Units withheld to pay taxes. The Class C Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for one share of our common stock per unit or, at our option, an equivalent amount in cash, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. The Class C Units were issued solely to “accredited investors” (as such term is defined in Rule 501 under the Securities Act) in reliance on the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.
40
Stock Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the cumulative total return (including dividends) to the holders of our common stock from
December 31, 2010
through
December 31, 2015
, with the cumulative total returns of the NYSE Composite Index, the FTSE NAREIT Composite REIT Index (the “Composite REIT Index”) and the S&P 500 Index over the same period. The comparison assumes $100 was invested on
December 31, 2010
in our common stock and in each of the foregoing indexes and assumes reinvestment of dividends, as applicable. We have included the NYSE Composite Index in the performance graph because our common stock is listed on the NYSE, and we have included the S&P 500 Index because we are a member of the S&P 500. We have included the Composite REIT Index because we believe that it is most representative of the industries in which we compete, or otherwise provides a fair basis for comparison with us, and is therefore particularly relevant to an assessment of our performance. The figures in the table below are rounded to the nearest dollar.
12/31/2010
12/31/2011
12/31/2012
12/31/2013
12/31/2014
12/31/2015
Ventas
$100
$109.77
$134.26
$124.00
$162.35
$153.33
NYSE Composite Index
$100
$96.43
$112.11
$141.71
$151.44
$145.40
Composite REIT Index
$100
$107.30
$128.47
$131.48
$167.28
$170.71
S&P 500 Index
$100
$102.11
$118.44
$156.78
$178.22
$180.67
41
ITEM 6.
Selected Financial Data
You should read the following selected financial data in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as acquisitions, dispositions, changes in accounting policies and other items may impact the comparability of the financial data.
As of and For the Years Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Operating Data
Rental income
$
1,346,046
$
1,138,457
$
1,036,356
$
894,495
$
596,445
Resident fees and services
1,811,255
1,552,951
1,406,005
1,227,124
865,800
Interest expense
367,114
292,065
249,009
199,801
114,492
Property-level operating expenses
1,383,640
1,195,388
1,109,925
966,812
645,082
General, administrative and professional fees
128,035
121,738
115,083
98,489
74,529
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
406,740
376,032
374,338
202,159
323,007
Discontinued operations
11,103
99,735
79,171
160,641
41,486
Net income attributable to common stockholders
417,843
475,767
453,509
362,800
364,493
Per Share Data
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions:
Basic
$
1.23
$
1.28
$
1.28
$
0.69
$
1.42
Diluted
$
1.22
$
1.26
$
1.27
$
0.68
$
1.40
Net income attributable to common stockholders:
Basic
$
1.26
$
1.62
$
1.55
$
1.24
$
1.60
Diluted
$
1.25
$
1.60
$
1.54
$
1.23
$
1.58
Dividends declared per common share
$
3.04
$
2.965
$
2.74
$
2.48
$
2.30
Other Data
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
1,391,767
$
1,254,845
$
1,194,755
$
992,816
$
773,197
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,423,692
)
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
(2,169,689
)
(997,439
)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
1,030,122
758,057
114,996
1,198,914
248,282
FFO (1)
1,365,408
1,273,680
1,208,458
1,024,567
824,851
Normalized FFO (1)
1,493,683
1,330,018
1,220,709
1,120,225
776,963
Balance Sheet Data
Real estate investments, at cost
$
23,802,454
$
20,196,770
$
19,798,805
$
19,745,607
$
17,830,262
Cash and cash equivalents
53,023
55,348
57,690
67,908
45,807
Total assets
22,261,918
21,165,913
18,706,921
18,980,000
17,271,910
Senior notes payable and other debt
11,206,996
10,844,351
8,295,908
8,413,646
6,429,116
_______________
(1)
We believe that net income, as defined by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), is the most appropriate earnings measurement. However, we consider Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and normalized FFO to be
42
appropriate measures of operating performance of an equity REIT. In particular, we believe that normalized FFO is useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to compare our operating performance to the operating performance of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis without having to account for differences caused by unanticipated items and other events such as transactions and litigation. In some cases, we provide information about identified non-cash components of FFO and normalized FFO because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess the impact of those items on our financial statements.
We use the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) definition of FFO. NAREIT defines FFO as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of real estate property, including gain on re-measurement of equity method investments, and impairment write-downs of depreciable real estate, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures will be calculated to reflect FFO on the same basis. We define normalized FFO as FFO excluding the following income and expense items (which may be recurring in nature): (a) merger-related costs and expenses, including amortization of intangibles, transition and integration expenses, and deal costs and expenses, including expenses and recoveries relating to our acquisition lawsuits; (b) the impact of any expenses related to asset impairment and valuation allowances, the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees, or additional costs, expenses, discounts, make-whole payments, penalties or premiums incurred as a result of early retirement or payment of our debt; (c) the non-cash effect of income tax benefits or expenses and derivative transactions that have non-cash mark-to-market impacts on our Consolidated Statements of Income; (d) the impact of future acquisitions, divestitures (including pursuant to tenant options to purchase) and capital transactions; (e) the financial impact of contingent consideration, severance-related costs, charitable donations made to the Ventas Charitable Foundation, gains and losses for non-operational foreign currency hedge agreements and changes in the fair value of financial instruments; and (f) expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements and related matters.
FFO and normalized FFO presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or otherwise disclosed by us, may not be comparable to FFO and normalized FFO presented by other real estate companies due to the fact that not all real estate companies use the same definitions. FFO and normalized FFO (or either measure adjusted for non-cash items) should not be considered as alternatives to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP) as indicators of our financial performance or as alternatives to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as measures of our liquidity, nor are FFO and normalized FFO (or either measure adjusted for non-cash items) necessarily indicative of sufficient cash flow to fund all of our needs. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Funds From Operations and Normalized Funds from Operations” included in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a reconciliation of FFO and normalized FFO to our GAAP earnings.
ITEM 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion provides information that management believes is relevant to an understanding and assessment of the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Ventas, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, unless otherwise indicated or except where the context otherwise requires, “we,” “us” or “our”). You should read this discussion in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as it will help you understand:
•
Our company and the environment in which we operate;
•
Our
2015
highlights and other recent developments;
•
Our critical accounting policies and estimates;
•
Our results of operations for the last three years;
•
How we manage our assets and liabilities;
•
Our liquidity and capital resources;
•
Our cash flows; and
•
Our future contractual obligations.
Corporate and Operating Environment
We are a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned approximately
1,300
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities,
43
medical office buildings (“MOBs”), skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals, and we had
four
properties under development. We are an S&P 500 company and currently headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased a total of
607
properties (excluding MOBs and properties classified as held for sale) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and we engaged independent operators, such as Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) and Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”), to manage
304
of our seniors housing communities (excluding properties classified as held for sale) for us pursuant to long-term management agreements. Our three largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”), Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) and Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”), leased from us
140
properties (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement),
76
properties and
ten
properties, respectively, as of
December 31, 2015
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Lillibridge”) subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC (“PMBRES”), we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
We conduct our operations through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties; senior living operations; and MOB operations. See “Note 20—Segment Information” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As of
December 31, 2015
, our consolidated portfolio included 100% ownership interests in
1,190
properties and controlling joint venture interests in
50
properties, and we had non-controlling ownership interests in
41
properties through investments in unconsolidated entities. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we provided management and leasing services to third parties with respect to
79
MOBs as of
December 31, 2015
.
We aim to enhance shareholder value by delivering consistent, superior total returns through a strategy of: (1) generating reliable and growing cash flows; (2) maintaining a balanced, diversified portfolio of high-quality assets; and (3) preserving our financial strength, flexibility and liquidity.
Our ability to access capital in a timely and cost-effective manner is critical to the success of our business strategy because it affects our ability to satisfy existing obligations, including the repayment of maturing indebtedness, and to make future investments. Factors such as general market conditions, interest rates, credit ratings on our securities, expectations of our potential future earnings and cash distributions, and the trading price of our common stock that are beyond our control and fluctuate over time all impact our access to and cost of external capital. For that reason, we generally attempt to match the long-term duration of our investments in real property with long-term financing through the issuance of shares of our common stock or the incurrence of long-term fixed rate debt. At
December 31, 2015
,
19.3%
of our consolidated debt (excluding debt related to properties classified as held for sale) was variable rate debt.
2015
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
Investments and Dispositions
•
In January 2015, we acquired American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction, which added
152
properties to our portfolio. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately 28.4 million shares of our common stock at
$78.00
per share and
1.1 million
limited partnership units.
•
On August 4, 2015, we completed our acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. (“AHS”) and simultaneous separation and sale of the Ardent hospital operating company (Ardent Health Partners, LLC, together with its subsidiaries “Ardent”) to a consortium composed of an entity controlled by Equity Group Investments, Ardent’s management team and us. As of the acquisition date, we recorded the estimated fair value of our investment in owned hospital and other real estate of approximately
$1.3 billion.
. At closing, we paid
$26.3 million
for our
9.9%
interest in Ardent, which represents our estimate of the acquisition date fair value of this interest. Upon closing, we entered into a long-term triple-net master lease with Ardent to operate hospitals and other real estate we acquired.
•
During 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately
$611.7 million
, including the acquisition of eleven triple-net leased properties;
eleven
MOBs; and
12
skilled nursing facilities (all of which were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off (as defined below)).
44
•
During 2015, we sold
39
triple-net leased properties and
26
MOBs for aggregate consideration of
$541.0 million
, including a
$6.0 million
lease termination fee.
•
During 2015, we received aggregate proceeds of
$173.8 million
in final repayment of loans receivable and sales of bonds we held, and recognized gains aggregating
$7.7 million
.
Capital and Dividends
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold 3,750,202 shares of common stock under our previous “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $285.4 million, after sales agent commissions of $4.4 million. Through the remainder of 2015 and in the first quarter of 2016 we have issued and sold a total of 5,084,302 shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $297.0 million, after sales agent commissions of $4.5 million.
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold
$1.1 billion
of senior notes with a weighted average interest rate below
3.7%
and a weighted average maturity of
15
years. The issuances were composed of
$900 million
aggregate principal amount of USD senior notes and CAD notes of
250 million
.
•
In July 2015, we issued and sold
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.218%
of par, for total proceeds of
$496.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
•
In August 2015, we completed a
$900 million
five
year term loan having a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus
1.0
basis points (the “Ardent Term Loan”). The term loan matures in 2020.
•
In 2015, we repaid
$305.0 million
of our unsecured term loan due 2019 and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.6 million
representing a write-off of the then unamortized deferred financing fees. Also, in May 2015, we repaid in full, at par,
$234.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
6%
senior notes due 2015.
•
In 2015, we paid an annual cash dividend on our common stock of
$3.04
per share. On August 17, 2015, we also distributed a stock dividend of one Care Capital Properties, Inc. (“CCP”) common share for every four shares of Ventas common stock held as of the distribution record date of August 10, 2015. The stock dividend was valued at $8.51 per Ventas share based on the opening price of CCP stock on its first day of regular-way trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
•
In February 2016, we entered into a $200 million notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at 1.132% through the maturity date of the swap. The maturity date of the Ardent Term Loan is also August 3, 2020.
Spin-Off
•
In August 2015, we completed the spin off of most of our post-acute/skilled nursing facility portfolio into an independent, publicly traded REIT named Care Capital Properties, Inc. (the “CCP Spin-Off”). The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities are presented as discontinued operations for all periods presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) set forth in the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”), as published by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions regarding future events that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. We base these estimates on our experience and assumptions we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. However, if our judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions or other matters had been different, we may have applied a different accounting treatment, resulting in a different presentation of our financial statements. We periodically reevaluate our estimates and assumptions, and in the event they prove to be different from actual results, we make adjustments in subsequent periods to reflect more current estimates and assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. We believe that the critical accounting policies described below, among others, affect our more significant
45
estimates and judgments used in the preparation of our financial statements. For more information regarding our critical accounting policies, see “Note 2—Accounting Policies” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Principles of Consolidation
The Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K include our accounts and the accounts of our wholly owned subsidiaries and the joint venture entities over which we exercise control. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation, and our net earnings are reduced by the portion of net earnings attributable to noncontrolling interests.
GAAP requires us to identify entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights and to determine which business enterprise is the primary beneficiary of variable interest entities (“VIEs”). A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; and (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. We consolidate our investment in a VIE when we determine that we are its primary beneficiary. We may change our original assessment of a VIE upon subsequent events such as the modification of contractual arrangements that affects the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposition of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.
We identify the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. We perform this analysis on an ongoing basis.
As it relates to investments in joint ventures, GAAP may preclude consolidation by the sole general partner in certain circumstances based on the type of rights held by the limited partner(s). We assess limited partners’ rights and their impact on the presumption of control of the limited partnership by the sole general partner when an investor becomes the sole general partner, and we perform a reassessment when there is a change to the terms or in the exercisability of the rights of the limited partners, the sole general partner increases or decreases its ownership of limited partnership interests, or there is an increase or decrease in the number of outstanding limited partnership interests. We also apply this guidance to managing member interests in limited liability companies.
Business Combinations
We account for acquisitions using the acquisition method and record the cost of the businesses acquired among tangible and recognized intangible assets and liabilities based upon their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. Recognized intangibles primarily include the value of in-place leases, acquired lease contracts, tenant and customer relationships, trade names/trademarks and goodwill. We do not amortize goodwill, which represents the excess of the purchase price paid over the fair value of the net assets of the acquired business and is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Our method for recording the purchase price to acquired investments in real estate requires us to make subjective assessments for determining fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. This includes determining the value of the buildings, land and improvements, construction in progress, ground leases, tenant improvements, in-place leases, above and/or below market leases, purchase option intangible assets and/or liabilities, and any debt assumed. These estimates require significant judgment and in some cases involve complex calculations. These assessments directly impact our results of operations, as amounts estimated for certain assets and liabilities have different depreciation or amortization lives. In addition, we amortize the value assigned to above and/or below market leases as a component of revenue, unlike in-place leases and other intangibles, which we include in depreciation and amortization in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
We estimate the fair value of buildings acquired on an as-if-vacant basis, or replacement cost basis, and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, generally not to exceed 35 years. We determine the fair value of other fixed assets, such as site improvements and furniture, fixtures and equipment, based upon the replacement cost and depreciate such value over the assets’ estimated remaining useful lives as determined at the applicable acquisition date. We determine the value of land either by considering the sales prices of similar properties in recent transactions or based on internal analysis of recently acquired and existing comparable properties within our portfolio. We generally determine the value of construction in progress based upon the replacement cost. However, for certain acquired properties that are part of a ground-up development, we determine fair value by using the same valuation approach as for all other properties and deducting the estimated cost to complete the development. During the remaining construction period, we capitalize interest expense until the
46
development has reached substantial completion. Construction in progress, including capitalized interest, is not depreciated until the development has reached substantial completion.
The fair value of acquired lease-related intangibles, if any, reflects: (i) the estimated value of any above and/or below market leases, determined by discounting the difference between the estimated market rent and in-place lease rent; and (ii) the estimated value of in-place leases related to the cost to obtain tenants, including leasing commissions, and an estimated value of the absorption period to reflect the value of the rent and recovery costs foregone during a reasonable lease-up period as if the acquired space was vacant. We amortize any acquired lease-related intangibles to revenue or amortization expense over the remaining life of the associated lease plus any assumed bargain renewal periods. If a lease is terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed upon expiration, we recognize all unamortized lease-related intangibles associated with that lease in operations at that time.
We estimate the fair value of purchase option intangible assets and liabilities by discounting the difference between the applicable property’s acquisition date fair value and an estimate of its future option price. We do not amortize the resulting intangible asset or liability over the term of the lease, but rather adjust the recognized value of the asset or liability upon sale.
We estimate the fair value of tenant or other customer relationships acquired, if any, by considering the nature and extent of existing business relationships with the tenant or customer, growth prospects for developing new business with the tenant or customer, the tenant’s credit quality, expectations of lease renewals with the tenant, and the potential for significant, additional future leasing arrangements with the tenant, and we amortize that value over the expected life of the associated arrangements or leases, including the remaining terms of the related leases and any expected renewal periods. We estimate the fair value of trade names and trademarks using a royalty rate methodology and amortize that value over the estimated useful life of the trade name or trademark.
In connection with a business combination, we may assume rights and obligations under certain lease agreements pursuant to which we become the lessee of a given property. We assume the lease classification previously determined by the prior lessee absent a modification in the assumed lease agreement. We assess assumed operating leases, including ground leases, to determine whether the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us given current market conditions on the acquisition date. To the extent the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable relative to market conditions on the acquisition date, we recognize an intangible asset or liability, as applicable, at fair value and amortize that asset or liability (excluding purchase option intangibles) to interest or rental expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income over the applicable lease term. We include all lease-related intangible assets and liabilities within acquired lease intangibles and accounts payable and other liabilities, respectively, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We determine the fair value of loans receivable acquired in connection with a business combination by discounting the estimated future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans on the same terms with the same length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings. We do not establish a valuation allowance at the acquisition date because the estimated future cash flows already reflect our judgment regarding their uncertainty. We recognize the difference between the acquisition date fair value and the total expected cash flows as interest income using an effective interest method over the life of the applicable loan. Subsequent to the acquisition date, we evaluate changes regarding the uncertainty of future cash flows and the need for a valuation allowance, as appropriate.
We estimate the fair value of noncontrolling interests assumed consistent with the manner in which we value all of the underlying assets and liabilities.
We base the initial carrying value of investments in unconsolidated entities on the fair value of the assets at the time we acquired the joint venture interest. We estimate fair values for our equity method investments based on discounted cash flow models that include all estimated cash inflows and outflows over a specified holding period and, where applicable, any estimated debt premiums or discounts. The capitalization rates, discount rates and credit spreads we use in these models are based upon assumptions that we believe to be within a reasonable range of current market rates for the respective investments.
We generally amortize any difference between our cost basis and the basis reflected at the joint venture level over the lives of the related assets and liabilities and include that amortization in our share of income or loss from unconsolidated entities. For earnings of equity method investments with pro rata distribution allocations, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on their respective stated ownership percentages. In other instances, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on the hypothetical liquidation at book value method.
We calculate the fair value of long-term debt by discounting the remaining contractual cash flows on each instrument at the current market rate for those borrowings, which we approximate based on the rate at which we would expect to incur a replacement instrument on the date of acquisition, and recognize any fair value adjustments related to long-term debt as effective yield adjustments over the remaining term of the instrument.
47
Impairment of Long-Lived and Intangible Assets
We periodically evaluate our long-lived assets, primarily consisting of investments in real estate, for impairment indicators. If indicators of impairment are present, we evaluate the carrying value of the related real estate investments in relation to the future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying operations. In performing this evaluation, we consider market conditions and our current intentions with respect to holding or disposing of the asset. We adjust the net book value of leased properties and other long-lived assets to fair value if the sum of the expected future undiscounted cash flows, including sales proceeds, is less than book value. We recognize an impairment loss at the time we make any such determination.
If impairment indicators arise with respect to intangible assets with finite useful lives, we evaluate impairment by comparing the carrying amount of the asset to the estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If estimated future undiscounted net cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, then we estimate the fair value of the asset and compare the estimated fair value to the intangible asset’s carrying value. We recognize any shortfall from carrying value as an impairment loss in the current period.
We evaluate our investments in unconsolidated entities for impairment at least annually, and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our investment may exceed its fair value. If we determine that a decline in the fair value of our investment in an unconsolidated entity is other-than-temporary, and if such reduced fair value is below the carrying value, we record an impairment.
We test goodwill for impairment at least annually, and more frequently if indicators arise. We first assess qualitative factors, such as current macroeconomic conditions, state of the equity and capital markets and our overall financial and operating performance, to determine the likelihood that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If we determine it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we proceed with the two-step approach to evaluating impairment. First, we estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and compare it to the reporting unit’s carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds fair value, we proceed with the second step, which requires us to assign the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit as if it had been acquired in a business combination at the date of the impairment test. The excess fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to the assets and liabilities is the implied value of goodwill and is used to determine the amount of impairment. We recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying value of goodwill exceeds the implied value in the current period.
Estimates of fair value used in our evaluation of goodwill (if necessary based on our qualitative assessment), investments in real estate, investments in unconsolidated entities and intangible assets are based upon discounted future cash flow projections or other acceptable valuation techniques that are based, in turn, upon all available evidence including level three inputs, such as revenue and expense growth rates, estimates of future cash flows, capitalization rates, discount rates, general economic conditions and trends, or other available market data. Our ability to accurately predict future operating results and cash flows and to estimate and allocate fair values impacts the timing and recognition of impairments. While we believe our assumptions are reasonable, changes in these assumptions may have a material impact on our financial results.
Loans Receivable
We record loans receivable, other than those acquired in connection with a business combination, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets (either in secured loans receivable and investments, net or other assets, in the case of non-mortgage loans receivable) at the unpaid principal balance, net of any deferred origination fees, purchase discounts or premiums and valuation allowances. We amortize net deferred origination fees, which are comprised of loan fees collected from the borrower net of certain direct costs, and purchase discounts or premiums over the contractual life of the loan using the effective interest method and immediately recognize in income any unamortized balances if the loan is repaid before its contractual maturity.
We regularly evaluate the collectibility of loans receivable based on factors such as corporate and facility-level financial and operational reports, compliance with financial covenants set forth in the applicable loan agreement, the financial strength of the borrower and any guarantor, the payment history of the borrower and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due under the terms of the applicable loan agreement, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be collected.
Fair Value
Fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement, and we determine fair value based on the assumptions that we expect market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, GAAP 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 that are classified within levels one and two of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within level three of the hierarchy).
48
Level one inputs utilize unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. Level two inputs consist of inputs other than quoted prices included in level one that are directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability. Level two inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets and other inputs for the asset or liability that are observable at commonly quoted intervals, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates and yield curves. Level three inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which typically are based on our own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity. If the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the hierarchy, the level within which the entire fair value measurement falls is the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. If the volume and level of market activity for an asset or liability has decreased significantly relative to the normal market activity for such asset or liability (or similar assets or liabilities), then transactions or quoted prices may not accurately reflect fair value. In addition, if there is evidence that a transaction for an asset or liability is not orderly, little, if any, weight is placed on that transaction price as an indicator of fair value. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.
Revenue Recognition
Triple-Net Leased Properties and MOB Operations
Certain of our triple-net leases and most of our MOB leases provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent. We recognize base rental revenues under these leases on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term when collectibility is reasonably assured. Recognizing rental income on a straight-line basis generally results in recognized revenues during the first half of a lease term exceeding the cash amounts contractually due from our tenants, creating a straight-line rent receivable that is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Certain of our leases provide for periodic increases in base rent only if certain revenue parameters or other substantive contingencies are met. We recognize the increased rental revenue under these leases as the related parameters or contingencies are met, rather than on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term.
Senior Living Operations
We recognize resident fees and services, other than move-in fees, monthly as services are provided. We recognize move-in fees on a straight-line basis over the average resident stay. Our lease agreements with residents generally have terms of 12 to 18 months and are cancelable by the resident upon 30 days’ notice.
Other
We recognize interest income from loans and investments, including discounts and premiums, using the effective interest method when collectibility is reasonably assured. We apply the effective interest method on a loan-by-loan basis and recognize discounts and premiums as yield adjustments over the related loan term. We recognize interest income on an impaired loan to the extent our estimate of the fair value of the collateral is sufficient to support the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest. When the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest is equal to our estimate of the fair value of the collateral, we recognize interest income on a cash basis. We provide a reserve against an impaired loan to the extent our total investment in the loan exceeds our estimate of the fair value of the loan collateral.
We recognize income from rent, lease termination fees, development services, management advisory services, and all other income when all of the following criteria are met in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Staff Accounting Bulletin 104: (i) the applicable agreement has been fully executed and delivered; (ii) services have been rendered; (iii) the amount is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectibility is reasonably assured.
Allowances
We assess the collectibility of our rent receivables, including straight-line rent receivables. We base our assessment of the collectibility of rent receivables (other than straight-line rent receivables) on several factors, including, among other things, payment history, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to recover the full value of the receivable, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be recovered. We also base our assessment of the collectibility of straight-line rent receivables on several factors, including, among other things, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the historical operations and operating trends of the property, the historical payment pattern of the tenant and the type of property. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to receive the rent payments due in the future, we provide a reserve against the recognized straight-line rent receivable asset for the portion, up to its full value, that we estimate may not be recovered. If we change our assumptions or
49
estimates regarding the collectibility of future rent payments required by a lease, we may adjust our reserve to increase or reduce the rental revenue recognized in the period we make such change in our assumptions or estimates.
Federal Income Tax
We have elected to be treated as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. Accordingly, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on net income that we distribute to our stockholders, provided that we continue to qualify as a REIT. However, with respect to certain of our subsidiaries that have elected to be treated as “taxable REIT subsidiaries” (“TRSs”), we record income tax expense or benefit, as those entities are subject to federal income tax similar to regular corporations. Certain foreign subsidiaries are subject to foreign income tax, although they did not elect to be treated as TRSs.
We account for deferred income taxes using the asset and liability method and recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in our financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Any increase or decrease in the deferred tax liability that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about expected future tax consequences of events, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur. Deferred income taxes also reflect the impact of operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. A valuation allowance is provided if we believe it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. Any increase or decrease in the valuation allowance that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about the realizability of the related deferred tax asset, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur.
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We recognize interest and penalties, if applicable, related to uncertain tax positions as part of income tax benefit (expense).
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Standards
In April 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-03,
Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs
(“ASU 2015-03”), which requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected. Also in August 2015, the FASB issues ASU 2015-15,
Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated With Line-of-Credit Arrangements
(“ASU 2015-15”) which clarifies the SEC staff’s position not objecting to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing such costs, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. We adopted ASU 2015-03 and 2015-15 for the quarter ended September 30, 2015. There were deferred financing costs of
$69.1 million
and
$60.3 million
as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively that are now classified within senior notes payable and other debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-16,
Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments
(“ASU 2015-16”) to simplify the accounting for business combinations, specifically as it relates to measurement-period adjustments. Acquiring entities in a business combination must recognize measurement-period adjustments in the reporting period in which the adjustment amounts are determined. Also, ASU 2015-16 requires entities to present separately on the face of the income statement (or disclose in the notes to the financial statements) the portion of the amount recorded in the current period earnings, by line item, that would have been recorded in previous reporting periods if the adjustment to the provisional amounts had been recognized as of the acquisition date. ASU 2015-16 is effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2016 and is to be applied prospectively to measurement-period adjustments that occur after the effective date. We do not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, Revenue
From Contracts With Customers
(“ASU 2014-09”), which outlines a comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers. ASU 2014-09 states that “an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.” While ASU 2014-09 specifically references contracts with customers, it may apply to certain other transactions such as the sale of real estate or equipment. In 2015, the FASB provided for a one-year deferral of the effective date for ASU 2014-09 which is now effective for us beginning January 1, 2018. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance; however, we do
50
not expect its adoption to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements, as a substantial portion of our revenue consists of rental income from leasing arrangements, which are specifically excluded from ASU 2014-09.
In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02,
Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis
(“ASU 2015-02”), which makes certain changes to both the variable interest model and the voting model, including changes to (1) the identification of variable interests (fees paid to a decision maker or service provider), (2) the variable interest entity characteristics for a limited partnership or similar entity and (3) the primary beneficiary determination. ASU 2015-02 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance; however, we do not expect its adoption to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Results of Operations
As of
December 31, 2015
, we operated through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and MOB operations. In our triple-net leased properties segment, we acquire and own seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our MOB operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease, and manage MOBs. Information provided for “all other” includes income from loans and investments and other miscellaneous income and various corporate-level expenses not directly attributable to any of our three reportable business segments. Assets included in “all other” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable.
The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying results of operations. Throughout this discussion, “continuing operations” does not include properties disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
51
Years Ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
The table below shows our results of operations for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
and the effect of changes in those results from period to period on our net income attributable to common stockholders.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Net Income
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
$
784,234
$
679,112
$
105,122
15.5
%
Senior Living Operations
601,840
516,395
85,445
16.5
MOB Operations
399,891
310,515
89,376
28.8
All Other
89,176
54,048
35,128
65.0
Total segment NOI
1,875,141
1,560,070
315,071
20.2
Interest and other income
1,052
4,263
(3,211
)
(75.3
)
Interest expense
(367,114
)
(292,065
)
(75,049
)
(25.7
)
Depreciation and amortization
(894,057
)
(725,216
)
(168,841
)
(23.3
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(128,035
)
(121,738
)
(6,297
)
(5.2
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(14,411
)
(5,564
)
(8,847
)
(>100)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(102,944
)
(43,304
)
(59,640
)
(>100)
Other
(17,957
)
(25,743
)
7,786
30.2
Income before loss from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
351,675
350,703
972
0.3
Loss from unconsolidated entities
(1,420
)
(139
)
(1,281
)
(>100)
Income tax benefit
39,284
8,732
30,552
>100
Income from continuing operations
389,539
359,296
30,243
8.4
Discontinued operations
11,103
99,735
(88,632
)
(88.9
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
18,580
17,970
610
3.4
Net income
419,222
477,001
(57,779
)
(12.1
)
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,379
1,234
(145
)
(11.8
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
(57,924
)
(12.2
)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties
NOI for our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment equals the rental income and other services revenue earned from our triple-net assets. We incur no direct operating expenses for this segment.
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
779,801
$
674,547
$
105,254
15.6
%
Other services revenue
4,433
4,565
(132
)
(2.9
)
Segment NOI
$
784,234
$
679,112
105,122
15.5
52
Triple-net leased properties segment NOI
increased
in
2015
over the prior year primarily due to rent from the properties we acquired during
2015
and
2014
, contractual escalations in rent pursuant to the terms of our leases, and increases in base and other rent under certain of our leases.
In our triple-net leased properties segment, our revenues generally consist of fixed rental amounts (subject to annual contractual escalations) received from our tenants in accordance with the applicable lease terms and do not vary based on the underlying operating performance of the properties. Therefore, while occupancy rates may affect the profitability of our tenants’ operations, they do not have a direct impact on our revenues or financial results. The following table sets forth average continuing occupancy rates related to the triple-net leased properties we owned at
December 31, 2015
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2015
(which is the most recent information available to us from our tenants) and average continuing occupancy rates related to the triple-net leased properties we owned at
December 31, 2014
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2014
.
Number of Properties at December 31, 2015 (1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2015 (1)
Number of Properties at December 31, 2014 (1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2014 (1)
Seniors Housing Communities
453
88.2
%
448
88.3
%
Skilled Nursing Facilities
53
81.4
281
79.6
Specialty Hospitals
46
57.8
47
56.6
General Acute Care Hospitals
12
50.6
—
—
(1)
Excludes properties included in discontinued operations during 2015 and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
, non-stabilized properties, properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and certain properties for which we do not receive occupancy information. Also excludes properties acquired during the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively, including properties acquired as part of the 2015 AHS acquisition, and properties that transitioned operators for which we do not have eight full quarters of results subsequent to the transition.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
507
same-store triple-net leased properties. Throughout this discussion, “same-store” refers to properties that we owned for the full period in both comparison periods.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
646,426
$
617,886
$
28,540
4.6
%
Other services revenue
4,433
4,565
(132
)
(2.9
)
Segment NOI
$
650,859
$
622,451
28,408
4.6
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our senior living operations reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,811,255
$
1,552,951
$
258,304
16.6
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(1,209,415
)
(1,036,556
)
(172,859
)
(16.7
)
Segment NOI
$
601,840
$
516,395
85,445
16.5
53
Revenues attributed to our senior living operations segment consist of resident fees and services, which include all amounts earned from residents at our seniors housing communities, such as rental fees related to resident leases, extended health care fees and other ancillary service income. Our senior living operations segment revenues
increased
in
2015
over the prior year primarily due to seniors housing communities we acquired during
2015
and
2014
, including the 2015 HCT acquisition and the 2014 acquisition of 29 seniors housings communities located in Canada from Holiday Retirement (the “Holiday Canada Acquisition”).
Property-level operating expenses related to our senior living operations segment include labor, food, utilities, marketing, management and other costs of operating the properties. Property-level operating expenses also
increased
year over year primarily due to the acquired properties described above, increases in salaries, repairs & maintenance costs, real estate taxes and higher management fees primarily due to increased revenues, partially offset by decreased incentive fees and property insurance costs.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
236
same-store senior living operating communities.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,523,421
$
1,485,146
$
38,275
2.6
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(1,028,996
)
(998,166
)
(30,830
)
(3.1
)
Segment NOI
$
494,425
$
486,980
7,445
1.5
The following table sets forth average unit occupancy rates and the average monthly revenue per occupied room related to continuing operations in our senior living operations segment for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy
for the Year
Ended
December 31,
Average Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for the Year
Ended
December 31,
2015
2014
2015
2014
2015
2014
Total seniors housing communities
305
270
91.2
%
91.1
%
$
5,255
$
5,407
Same-store seniors housing communities
236
236
91.1
91.0
5,718
5,579
54
Segment NOI—MOB Operations
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our MOB operations reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
566,245
$
463,910
$
102,335
22.1
%
Medical office building services revenue
34,436
22,529
11,907
52.9
Total revenues
600,681
486,439
114,242
23.5
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(174,225
)
(158,832
)
(15,393
)
(9.7
)
Medical office building services costs
(26,565
)
(17,092
)
(9,473
)
(55.4
)
Segment NOI
$
399,891
$
310,515
89,376
28.8
The increase in our MOB operations segment rental income in
2015
over the prior year is attributed primarily to the MOBs we acquired during
2015
and
2014
as well as same-store revenue growth and an increase in lease termination fees. The increase in our MOB property-level operating expenses is due primarily to those acquired MOBs and increases in cleaning, administrative wages and real estate tax expenses, partially offset by decreases in operating costs resulting from expense controls.
Medical office building services revenue and costs both increased in
2015
over the prior year primarily due to increased construction activity during
2015
compared to
2014
. Management fee revenue also increased due to insourcing completed during 2014 and 2015.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
275
same-store MOBs.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
450,463
$
447,437
$
3,026
0.7
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(152,533
)
(152,680
)
147
0.1
Segment NOI
$
297,930
$
294,757
3,173
1.1
The following table sets forth occupancy rates and the annualized average rent per occupied square foot related to continuing operations in our MOB operations segment at and for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2015
2014
2015
2014
Total MOBs
361
277
91.7
%
90.2
%
$30
$30
Same-store MOBs
275
275
90.8
91.2
31
31
Segment NOI—All Other
All other NOI consists solely of income from loans and investments. Income from loans and investments
increased
in
2015
over the prior year due primarily to higher investment balances and prepayment income during 2015, partially offset by lower weighted average interest rates on loan balances in 2015 compared to 2014.
55
Interest Expense
The
$49.0 million
increase
in total interest expense, including interest allocated to discontinued operations of
$60.4 million
and
$86.5 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively, is attributed primarily to
$53.6 million
of additional interest due to higher debt balances, partially offset by a
$6.5 million
reduction in interest due to lower effective interest rates, including the amortization of any fair value adjustments. Our effective interest rate was
3.6%
for
2015
, compared to
3.7%
for
2014
.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense
increased
$168.8 million
in
2015
primarily due to the real estate acquisitions we made in
2014
and
2015
.
General, Administrative and Professional Fees
General, administrative and professional fees
increased
$6.3 million
in
2015
primarily due to our increased employee head count as a result of organizational growth, partially offset by savings related to the CCP Spin-Off.
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt, Net
The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in
2015
and
2014
resulted primarily from various debt repayments we made to improve our credit profile. The 2015 repayments were made primarily with proceeds from the distribution paid to us at the time of the CCP Spin-Off.
Merger-Related Expenses and Deal Costs
Merger-related expenses and deal costs in both years consist of transition, integration, deal and severance-related expenses primarily related to pending and consummated transactions required by GAAP to be expensed rather than capitalized into the asset value. The
$59.6 million
increase
in merger-related expenses and deal costs in
2015
over the prior year is primarily due to increased
2015
investment activity and costs related to CCP Spin-Off.
Other
Other primarily includes building rent expense paid to lease certain of our senior living operating communities, as well as certain unreimbursable expenses related to our triple-net leased portfolio and expenses related to the re-audit and re-review of our historical financial statements.
Income Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit for
2015
was due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses of certain taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS” or “TRS entities”). These losses were mainly attributable to the depreciation and amortization of fixed and intangible assets recorded as deferred tax liabilities in purchase accounting. Income tax benefit for
2014
was due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses and restructuring related to one of our TRS entities.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations primarily relates to the operations of assets and liabilities disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off. The decrease in income from discontinued operations for
2015
compared to
2014
is primarily the result of
$46.4 million
of transaction and separation costs associated with the spin. Also,
2014
includes a full year of net income for the CCP operations whereas
2015
only includes net income through August 17, 2015, the date of the CCP Spin-Off.
Gain on Real Estate Dispositions
The gain on real estate dispositions in
2015
and
2014
primarily relates to the sale of
45
and
ten
properties, respectively.
56
Years Ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
The table below shows our results of operations for the years ended December 31,
2014
and
2013
and the effect of changes in those results from period to period on our net income attributable to common stockholders.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Net Income
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
$
679,112
$
590,485
$
88,627
15.0
%
Senior Living Operations
516,395
449,321
67,074
14.9
MOB Operations
310,515
300,861
9,654
3.2
All Other
54,048
55,688
(1,640
)
(2.9
)
Total segment NOI
1,560,070
1,396,355
163,715
11.7
Interest and other income
4,263
2,022
2,241
>100
Interest expense
(292,065
)
(249,009
)
(43,056
)
(17.3
)
Depreciation and amortization
(725,216
)
(629,908
)
(95,308
)
(15.1
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(121,738
)
(115,083
)
(6,655
)
(5.8
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(5,564
)
(1,201
)
(4,363
)
(>100)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(43,304
)
(21,634
)
(21,670
)
(>100)
Other
(25,743
)
(17,364
)
(8,379
)
(48.3
)
Income before loss from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
350,703
364,178
(13,475
)
(3.7
)
Loss from unconsolidated entities
(139
)
(508
)
369
72.6
Income tax benefit
8,732
11,828
(3,096
)
(26.2
)
Income from continuing operations
359,296
375,498
(16,202
)
(4.3
)
Discontinued operations
99,735
79,171
20,564
26.0
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
—
17,970
nm
Net income
477,001
454,669
22,332
4.9
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,234
1,160
(74
)
(6.4
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
453,509
22,258
4.9
nm—not meaningful
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
674,547
$
586,016
$
88,531
15.1
%
Other services revenue
4,565
4,469
96
2.1
Segment NOI
$
679,112
$
590,485
88,627
15.0
Triple-net leased properties segment NOI
increased
in 2014 over the prior year primarily due to rent from the properties we acquired during 2014 and 2013, contractual escalations in rent pursuant to the terms of our leases, and increases in base and other rent under certain of our leases.
57
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
477
same-store triple-net leased properties.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
546,301
$
524,676
$
21,625
4.1
%
Other services revenue
4,565
4,469
96
2.1
Segment NOI
$
550,866
$
529,145
21,721
4.1
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our senior living operations reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,552,951
$
1,406,005
$
146,946
10.5
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(1,036,556
)
(956,684
)
(79,872
)
(8.3
)
Segment NOI
$
516,395
$
449,321
67,074
14.9
Our senior living operations segment revenues
increased
in
2014
over the prior year primarily due to the Holiday Canada Acquisition and other seniors housing communities we acquired during 2014 and 2013.
Property-level operating expenses also
increased
year over year primarily due to the acquired properties described above.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
219
same-store senior living operating communities.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,384,878
$
1,357,088
$
27,790
2.0
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(937,671
)
(925,478
)
(12,193
)
(1.3
)
Segment NOI
$
447,207
$
431,610
15,597
3.6
The following table sets forth average unit occupancy rates and the average monthly revenue per occupied room related to continuing operations in our senior living operations segment for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
Average
Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
2014
2013
2014
2013
2014
2013
Total seniors housing communities
270
239
91.1
%
91.1
%
$5,407
$5,470
Same-store seniors housing communities
219
219
91.1
91.2
5,673
5,553
58
Segment NOI—MOB Operations
The following table summarizes results of continuing operations in our MOB operations reportable business segment:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
463,910
$
450,340
$
13,570
3.0
%
Medical office building services revenue
22,529
12,077
10,452
86.5
Total revenues
486,439
462,417
24,022
5.2
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(158,832
)
(153,241
)
(5,591
)
(3.6
)
Medical office building services costs
(17,092
)
(8,315
)
(8,777
)
(105.6
)
Segment NOI
$
310,515
$
300,861
9,654
3.2
The increase in our MOB operations segment rental income in 2014 over the prior year is attributed primarily to the MOBs we acquired during 2014 and 2013 and slightly higher base rents. The increase in our MOB property-level operating expenses is due primarily to those acquired MOBs and increases in utilities, snow removal, payroll and insurance expenses, partially offset by decreases in operating costs resulting from expense controls.
Medical office building services revenue and costs both increased in 2014 over the prior year primarily due to increased construction activity during 2014 compared to 2013.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
297
same-store MOBs.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease)
to Segment NOI
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
440,755
$
435,786
$
4,969
1.1
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(150,585
)
(147,987
)
(2,598
)
(1.8
)
Segment NOI
$
290,170
$
287,799
2,371
0.8
The following table sets forth occupancy rates and the annualized average rent per occupied square foot related to continuing operations in our MOB operations segment at and for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2014
2013
2014
2013
Total MOBs
311
309
89.8
%
90.1
%
$31
$29
Same-store MOBs
297
297
89.8
90.0
30
29
Segment NOI—All Other
All other NOI consists solely of income from loans and investments. Income from loans and investments
decreased
in
2014
over the prior year due primarily to final repayments and sales of portions of certain loans receivable throughout 2013.
Interest Expense
The
$38.2 million
increase
in total interest expense, including interest allocated to discontinued operations of
$86.5 million
and
$91.4 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively, is attributed primarily to $50.9
59
million of additional interest due to higher debt balances, partially offset by a $15.6 million reduction in interest due to lower effective interest rates, including the amortization of any fair value adjustments. Our effective interest rate was 3.7% for
2014
, compared to 3.8% for
2013
.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense
increased
$95.3 million
in
2014
primarily due to real estate acquisitions we made in 2013 and 2014.
General, Administrative and Professional Fees
General, administrative and professional fees
increased
$6.7 million
in
2014
primarily due to our continued organizational growth.
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt, Net
The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in 2014 resulted primarily from various debt repayments. The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in 2013 resulted primarily from the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees as a result of replacing our previous $2.0 billion unsecured revolving credit facility with a new $3.0 billion unsecured credit facility and the repayment of certain mortgage debt.
Merger-Related Expenses and Deal Costs
Merger-related expenses and deal costs in both years consist of transition, integration, deal and severance-related expenses primarily related to pending and consummated transactions required by GAAP to be expensed rather than capitalized into the asset value. The
$21.7 million
increase
in merger-related expenses and deal costs in 2014 over the prior year is primarily due to increased 2014 investment activity.
Other
Other primarily includes building rent expense paid to lease certain of our senior living operating communities, as well as certain unreimbursable expenses related to our triple-net leased portfolio. For the year ended December 31, 2014, other also includes expenses related to the re-audit and re-review of our historical financial statements.
Income Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit for
2014
was due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses and restructuring related to one of our TRS entities. Income tax benefit for 2013 was due primarily to the release of valuation allowances against certain deferred tax assets related to one of our TRS entities.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations primarily relates to the operations of assets and liabilities disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off, and impairments of $1.5 million and $39.7 million recorded in 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Gain on Real Estate Dispositions
The gain on real estate dispositions in 2014 resulted primarily from the sale of ten properties that are not classified as discontinued operations in accordance with ASU 2014-08, resulting in a net gain of $18.0 million. Gains on real estate dispositions in 2013 are classified in discontinued operations.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We believe that net income, as defined by GAAP, is the most appropriate earnings measurement. However, we consider certain non-GAAP financial measures to be useful supplemental measures of our operating performance. A non-GAAP financial measure is a measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are not so excluded from or included in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Described below are the non-GAAP financial measures used by management to evaluate our operating performance and that we consider most useful to investors, together with reconciliations of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.
The non-GAAP financial measures we present in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may not be comparable to those presented by other real estate companies due to the fact that not all real estate companies use the same definitions. You should not consider these measures as alternatives to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP) as indicators of our financial performance or as alternatives to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as measures of
60
our liquidity, nor are these measures necessarily indicative of sufficient cash flow to fund all of our needs. In order to facilitate a clear understanding of our consolidated historical operating results, you should examine these measures in conjunction with net income as presented in our Consolidated Financial Statements and other financial data included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Funds From Operations and Normalized Funds From Operations
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. However, since real estate values historically have risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors deem presentations of operating results for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. For that reason, we consider Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and normalized FFO to be appropriate measures of operating performance of an equity REIT. In particular, we believe that normalized FFO is useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to compare our operating performance to the operating performance of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis without having to account for differences caused by unanticipated items and other events such as transactions and litigation. In some cases, we provide information about identified non-cash components of FFO and normalized FFO because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess the impact of those items on our financial results.
We use the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) definition of FFO. NAREIT defines FFO as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of real estate property, including gain on re-measurement of equity method investments, and impairment write-downs of depreciable real estate, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures will be calculated to reflect FFO on the same basis. We define normalized FFO as FFO excluding the following income and expense items (which may be recurring in nature): (a) merger-related costs and expenses, including amortization of intangibles, transition and integration expenses, and deal costs and expenses, including expenses and recoveries relating to our acquisition lawsuits; (b) the impact of any expenses related to asset impairment and valuation allowances, the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees, or additional costs, expenses, discounts, make-whole payments, penalties or premiums incurred as a result of early retirement or payment of our debt; (c) the non-cash effect of income tax benefits or expenses and derivative transactions that have non-cash mark-to-market impacts on our Consolidated Statements of Income; (d) the impact of future acquisitions, divestitures (including pursuant to tenant options to purchase) and capital transactions; (e) the financial impact of contingent consideration, severance-related costs, charitable donations made to the Ventas Charitable Foundation, gains and losses for non-operational foreign currency hedge agreements and changes in the fair value of financial instruments; and (f) expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements and related matters.
61
The following table summarizes our FFO and normalized FFO for each of the five years ended
December 31, 2015
. Our normalized FFO for the year ended
December 31, 2015
increased over the prior year due primarily to accretive acquisitions and increases in property NOI, partially offset by increased interest expense and a partial year’s results from the properties that were transferred to CCP on August 17, 2015 in connection with the CCP Spin-Off.
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
(In thousands)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
$
453,509
$
362,800
$
364,493
Adjustments:
Real estate depreciation and amortization
887,126
718,649
624,245
616,095
390,995
Real estate depreciation related to noncontrolling interest
(7,906
)
(10,314
)
(10,512
)
(8,503
)
(3,471
)
Real estate depreciation related to unconsolidated entities
7,353
5,792
6,543
7,516
6,552
Loss (gain) on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
176
—
(1,241
)
(16,645
)
—
Gain on real estate dispositions
(18,580
)
(17,970
)
—
—
—
Discontinued operations:
Gain on real estate dispositions
(212
)
(1,494
)
(4,059
)
(80,952
)
—
Depreciation on real estate assets
79,608
103,250
139,973
144,256
66,282
FFO
1,365,408
1,273,680
1,208,458
1,024,567
824,851
Adjustments:
Litigation proceeds, net
—
—
—
—
(202,259
)
Change in fair value of financial instruments
460
5,121
449
99
2,959
Income tax benefit
(42,384
)
(9,431
)
(11,828
)
(6,286
)
(31,137
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
15,797
5,013
1,048
37,640
27,604
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
152,344
54,389
21,560
63,183
153,923
Amortization of other intangibles
2,058
1,246
1,022
1,022
1,022
Normalized FFO
$
1,493,683
$
1,330,018
$
1,220,709
$
1,120,225
$
776,963
62
Adjusted EBITDA
We consider Adjusted EBITDA an important supplemental measure to net income because it provides another manner in which to evaluate our operating performance and serves as another indicator of our ability to service debt. We define Adjusted EBITDA as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (including non-cash stock-based compensation expense), excluding gains or losses on extinguishment of debt, merger-related expenses and deal costs, expenses related to the re-audit and re-review of our historical financial statements, net gains on real estate activity and changes in the fair value of financial instruments (including amounts in discontinued operations). The following table sets forth a reconciliation of our net income attributable to common stockholders to Adjusted EBITDA (including amounts in discontinued operations) for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
$
453,509
Adjustments:
Interest
427,542
378,556
340,381
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
14,411
5,564
1,048
Taxes (including amounts in general, administrative and professional fees)
(37,112
)
(4,770
)
(7,166
)
Depreciation and amortization
973,665
828,466
769,881
Non-cash stock-based compensation expense
19,537
20,994
20,653
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
150,290
53,847
21,634
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,499
1,419
1,380
Gain on real estate dispositions
(18,811
)
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
Changes in fair value of financial instruments
460
5,121
449
Gain on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
176
—
(1,241
)
Adjusted EBITDA
$
1,949,500
$
1,745,781
$
1,596,911
63
NOI
We also consider NOI an important supplemental measure to net income because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess our unlevered property-level operating results and to compare our operating results with the operating results of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis. We define NOI as total revenues, less interest and other income, property-level operating expenses and medical office building services costs (including amounts in discontinued operations). Cash receipts may differ due to straight-line recognition of certain rental income and the application of other GAAP policies. The following table sets forth a reconciliation of NOI to net income attributable to common stockholders (including amounts in discontinued operations) for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
$
453,509
Adjustments:
Interest and other income
(1,115
)
(5,017
)
(2,047
)
Interest
427,542
378,556
340,381
Depreciation and amortization
973,665
828,466
769,881
General, administrative and professional fees
128,044
121,746
115,109
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
14,411
5,564
1,048
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
149,346
45,051
21,634
Other
19,577
39,337
18,325
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,499
1,419
1,380
Loss from unconsolidated entities
1,420
139
508
Income tax benefit
(39,284
)
(8,732
)
(11,828
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
(18,811
)
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
NOI
2,074,137
1,863,113
1,704,283
Discontinued operations
(198,996
)
(303,043
)
(307,928
)
NOI (excluding amounts in discontinued operations)
$
1,875,141
$
1,560,070
$
1,396,355
Asset/Liability Management
Asset/liability management, a key element of enterprise risk management, is designed to support the achievement of our business strategy, while ensuring that we maintain appropriate and tolerable levels of market risk (primarily interest rate risk and foreign currency exchange risk) and credit risk. Effective management of these risks is a contributing factor to the absolute levels and variability of our FFO and net worth. The following discussion addresses our integrated management of assets and liabilities, including the use of derivative financial instruments.
Market Risk
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates with respect to borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility and our unsecured term loans, certain of our mortgage loans that are floating rate obligations, mortgage loans receivable that bear interest at floating rates and marketable debt securities. These market risks result primarily from changes in LIBOR rates or prime rates. To manage these risks, we continuously monitor our level of floating rate debt with respect to total debt and other factors, including our assessment of current and future economic conditions.
64
The table below sets forth certain information with respect to our debt, excluding premiums and discounts.
As of December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
$
7,534,459
$
6,677,875
$
5,418,543
Mortgage loans and other (1)
1,554,062
1,810,716
2,155,155
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
180,683
919,099
376,343
Unsecured term loans
1,568,477
990,634
1,000,702
Mortgage loans and other
433,339
474,047
369,734
Total
$
11,271,020
$
10,872,371
$
9,320,477
Percent of total debt:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
66.9
%
61.4
%
58.1
%
Mortgage loans and other (1)
13.8
16.6
23.1
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
1.6
8.5
4.0
Unsecured term loans
13.9
9.1
10.7
Mortgage loans and other
3.8
4.4
4.1
Total
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Weighted average interest rate at end of period:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
3.5
%
3.5
%
3.7
%
Mortgage loans and other (1)
5.7
5.9
6.0
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
1.4
1.4
1.2
Unsecured term loans
1.4
1.3
1.3
Mortgage loans and other
2.0
2.3
1.7
Total
3.5
3.5
3.8
(1)
Excludes mortgage debt of
$22.9 million
,
$27.6 million
and
$13.1 million
related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, respectively. All amounts were included in liabilities related to assets held for sale on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The variable rate debt in the table above reflects, in part, the effect of
$150.5 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with a maturity of March 21, 2018 that effectively convert fixed rate debt to variable rate debt. In addition, the fixed rate debt in the table above reflects, in part, the effect of
$48.1 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from October 1, 2016 to April 1, 2019, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt.
In February 2016, we entered into a $200 million notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at 1.132% through the maturity date of the swap. The maturity date of the Ardent Term Loan is also August 3, 2020.
The
decrease
in our outstanding variable rate debt at
December 31, 2015
compared to
December 31, 2014
is primarily attributable to the repayment of borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility and our unsecured term loan due 2019, partially offset by borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2020.
Pursuant to the terms of certain leases with one of our tenants, if interest rates increase on certain variable rate debt that we have totaling
$80.0 million
as of
December 31, 2015
, our tenant is required to pay us additional rent (on a dollar-for-dollar
65
basis) in an amount equal to the increase in interest expense resulting from the increased interest rates. Therefore, the increase in interest expense related to this debt is equally offset by an increase in additional rent due to us from the tenant. Assuming a 100 basis point increase in the weighted average interest rate related to our variable rate debt and assuming no change in our variable rate debt outstanding as of
December 31, 2015
, interest expense for
2016
would increase by approximately
$21.9 million
, or
$0.07
per diluted common share.
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, our joint venture and operating partners’ aggregate share of total debt was
$132.6 million
and
$141.4 million
, respectively, with respect to certain properties we owned through consolidated joint ventures and an operating partnership. Total debt does not include our portion of debt related to investments in unconsolidated entities, which was
$90.1 million
and
$97.5 million
as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively.
The fair value of our fixed and variable rate debt is based on current interest rates at which we could obtain similar borrowings. For fixed rate debt, interest rate fluctuations generally affect the fair value, but not our earnings or cash flows. Therefore, interest rate risk does not have a significant impact on our fixed rate debt obligations until their maturity or earlier prepayment and refinancing. If interest rates have risen at the time we seek to refinance our fixed rate debt, whether at maturity or otherwise, our future earnings and cash flows could be adversely affected by additional borrowing costs. Conversely, lower interest rates at the time of refinancing may reduce our overall borrowing costs.
To highlight the sensitivity of our fixed rate debt to changes in interest rates, the following summary shows the effects of a hypothetical instantaneous change of 100 basis points in interest rates as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
As of December 31,
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Gross book value
$
9,088,521
$
8,488,591
Fair value (1)
9,170,508
8,817,982
Fair value reflecting change in interest rates (1):
-100 basis points
9,674,423
9,256,492
+100 basis points
8,708,963
8,406,735
(1)
The change in fair value of our fixed rate debt from
December 31, 2014
to
December 31, 2015
was due primarily to 2015 senior note issuances, net of repayments, and mortgage loan repayments.
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, the fair value of our secured and non-mortgage loans receivable, based on our estimates of currently prevailing rates for comparable loans, was
$855.7 million
and
$767.9 million
, respectively. See “Note 6—Loans Receivable and Investments” and “Note 11—Fair Values of Financial Instruments” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As a result of our Canadian and United Kingdom operations, we are subject to fluctuations in certain foreign currency exchange rates that may, from time to time, affect our financial condition and operating performance. Based solely on our results for the year ended
December 31, 2015
(including the impact of existing hedging arrangements), if the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the British pound and Canadian dollar were to increase or decrease by one standard deviation compared to the average exchange rate during the year, our normalized FFO per share for the year ended
December 31, 2015
would decrease or increase, as applicable, by approximately $0.01 per share or less than 1%. We will continue to mitigate these risks through a layered approach to hedging looking out for the next year and continual assessment of our foreign operational capital structure. Nevertheless, we cannot assure you that any such fluctuations will not have an effect on our earnings.
66
Concentration and Credit Risk
We use concentration ratios to identify, understand and evaluate the potential impact of economic downturns and other adverse events that may affect our asset types, geographic locations, business models, and tenants, operators and managers. We evaluate concentration risk in terms of investment mix and operations mix. Investment mix measures the percentage of our investments that is concentrated in a specific asset type or that is operated or managed by a particular tenant, operator or manager. Operations mix measures the percentage of our operating results that is attributed to a particular tenant, operator or manager, geographic location or business model. The following tables reflect our concentration risk as of the dates and for the periods presented:
As of
December 31,
2015
2014
Investment mix by asset type (1):
Seniors housing communities
65.2
%
73.4
%
MOBs
21.7
18.1
Skilled nursing facilities
1.6
2.1
Specialty hospitals
2.1
1.8
General acute care hospitals
5.9
0.8
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
3.5
3.8
Investment mix by tenant, operator and manager (1):
Atria
22.5
%
26.8
%
Sunrise
11.7
13.9
Brookdale Senior Living
8.5
11.5
Kindred
2.1
2.3
All other
55.2
45.5
(1)
Ratios are based on the gross book value of real estate investments (excluding assets classified as held for sale) as of each reporting date.
67
For the Year Ended
December 31,
2015
2014
2013
Operations mix by tenant and operator and business model:
Revenues (1):
Senior living operations
55.1
%
56.0
%
56.1
%
Kindred
5.6
5.9
6.2
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
5.3
6.1
6.2
All others
34.0
32.0
31.5
Adjusted EBITDA (3):
Senior living operations
29.8
%
28.4
%
26.0
%
Kindred
8.8
10.1
16.1
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
8.2
9.2
10.9
All others
53.2
52.3
47.0
NOI (4):
Senior living operations
32.1
%
33.1
%
32.2
%
Kindred
9.8
10.6
11.2
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
9.3
10.9
11.2
All others
48.8
45.4
45.4
Operations mix by geographic location (5):
California
15.4
%
15.4
%
15.4
%
New York
8.8
8.8
8.8
Texas
6.1
6.1
6.1
Illinois
4.9
4.9
4.9
Florida
4.6
4.6
4.6
All others
60.2
60.2
60.2
(1)
Total revenues include medical office building and other services revenue, revenue from loans and investments and interest and other income (excluding amounts in discontinued operations).
(2)
Excludes one seniors housing community included in senior living operations.
(3)
Includes amounts in discontinued operations.
(4)
Excludes amounts in discontinued operations.
(5)
Ratios are based on total revenues (excluding amounts in discontinued operations) for each period presented.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional disclosure and reconciliations of net income attributable to common stockholders to Adjusted EBITDA and NOI as computed in accordance with GAAP.
We derive a significant portion of our revenues by leasing assets under long-term triple-net leases in which the rental rate is generally fixed with annual escalators, subject to certain limitations. Some of our triple-net lease escalators are contingent upon the satisfaction of specified facility revenue parameters or based on increases in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”), with caps, floors or collars. We also earn revenues directly from individual residents in our seniors housing communities that are managed by independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, and tenants in our MOBs. For the year ended
December 31, 2015
,
29.8%
of our Adjusted EBITDA (including amounts in discontinued operations) was derived from our senior living operations and MOB operations, for which rental rates may fluctuate more frequently upon lease rollovers and renewals due to shorter term leases and changing economic or market conditions.
The concentration of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and operating income that are attributed to Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent creates credit risk. If either Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions
68
to our stockholders could be limited. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to effectively conduct its operations or to maintain and improve our properties could adversely affect its business reputation and its ability to attract and retain patients and residents in our properties, which could have an indirect Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—Our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent account for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and operating income; Any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and “Note 3
—
Concentration of Credit Risk” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We regularly monitor and assess any changes in the relative credit risk of our significant tenants, and in particular those tenants that have recourse obligations under our triple-net leases. The ratios and metrics we use to evaluate a significant tenant’s liquidity and creditworthiness depend on facts and circumstances specific to that tenant and the industry or industries in which it operates, including without limitation the tenant’s credit history and economic conditions related to the tenant, its operations and the markets in which the tenant operates, that may vary over time. Among other things, we may (i) review and analyze information regarding the real estate, seniors housing and healthcare industries generally, publicly available information regarding the significant tenant, and information required to be provided by the tenant under the terms of its lease agreements with us, (ii) examine monthly and/or quarterly financial statements of the significant tenant to the extent publicly available or otherwise provided under the terms of our lease agreements, and (iii) participate in periodic discussions and in-person meetings with representatives of the significant tenant. Using this information, we calculate multiple financial ratios (which may, but do not necessarily, include net debt to EBITDAR or EBITDARM, fixed charge coverage and tangible net worth), after making certain adjustments based on our judgment, and assess other metrics we deem relevant to an understanding of the significant tenant’s credit risk.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, we rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on our managers to set appropriate resident fees and to otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under the agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership or any adverse developments in their businesses and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; Adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” and “—We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
In December 2012, we acquired a 34% ownership interest in Atria, which entitles us to certain rights and minority protections as well as the right to appoint two of five members on the Atria board of directors.
Triple-Net Lease Expirations
If our tenants are not able or willing to renew our triple-net leases upon expiration, we may be unable to reposition the applicable properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all. Although our lease expirations are staggered, the non-renewal of some or all of our triple-net leases that expire in any given year could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. During the year ended
December 31, 2015
, we had no triple-net lease renewals or expirations without renewal that, in the aggregate, had a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations for that period. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us” included in Part I, Item IA of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
69
The following table summarizes our triple-net lease expirations currently scheduled to occur over the next ten years (excluding leases related to assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
):
Number of
Properties
2015 Annual
Rental Income
% of 2015 Total
Triple-Net Leased Properties Segment Rental
Income
(Dollars in thousands)
2016
1
$
895
0.1
%
2017
23
16,944
2.2
2018
19
51,879
6.7
2019
73
117,849
15.1
2020
64
61,243
7.9
2021
73
65,508
8.4
2022
15
8,899
1.1
2023
14
29,264
3.8
2024
35
22,059
2.8
2025
70
110,608
14.2
In December 2014, we entered into favorable agreements with Kindred to transition or sell the operations of
nine
licensed healthcare assets, make modifications to the master leases governing
34
leased assets, and reimburse us for certain deferred capital expenditures at skilled nursing facilities previously transferred to new operators. In January 2015, Kindred paid us
$37 million
in connection with these agreements, which is being amortized over the remaining lease term for the
34
assets governed by the modified master leases. We own or have the rights to all licenses and CONs at the
nine
properties to be transitioned or sold, and Kindred has extensive and detailed obligations to cooperate and ensure an orderly transition of the properties to another operator. As of
December 31, 2015
,
four
of the
nine
properties have been sold and
three
of the
nine
properties were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had a total of
$53.0 million
of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, operating cash and cash related to our senior living operations and MOB operations reportable business segments that is deposited and held in property-level accounts. Funds maintained in the property-level accounts are used primarily for the payment of property-level expenses, debt service payments and certain capital expenditures. As of
December 31, 2015
, we also had escrow deposits and restricted cash of
$77.9 million
and
$1.8 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
During
2015
, our principal sources of liquidity were cash flows from operations, borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility and CAD unsecured term loan, proceeds from the issuance of debt and equity securities, proceeds from asset sales and cash on hand.
For the next 12 months, our principal liquidity needs are to: (i) fund operating expenses; (ii) meet our debt service requirements; (iii) repay maturing mortgage and other debt, including
$550.0 million
of senior notes; (iv) fund capital expenditures; (v) fund acquisitions, investments and commitments, including development and redevelopment activities; and (vi) make distributions to our stockholders and unitholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT. In addition, we may elect to prepay outstanding indebtedness prior to maturity based on our analysis of various factors. We expect that these liquidity needs generally will be satisfied by a combination of the following: cash flows from operations, cash on hand, debt assumptions and financings (including secured financings), issuances of debt and equity securities, dispositions of assets (in whole or in part through joint venture arrangements with third parties) and borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility. However, an inability to access liquidity through multiple capital sources concurrently could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure—Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
In January 2015, we funded the HCT Acquisition through the issuance of approximately 28.4 million shares of our common stock and 1.1 million limited partnership units that are redeemable for shares of our common stock, the payment of
70
approximately $11 million in cash (excluding cash in lieu of fractional shares) and the assumption or repayment of debt, net of HCT cash on hand.
Beginning on January 16, 2016 and as of February 10, 2016, third party investors executed redemption right exercise notices for Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. to redeem
303,136
Class C Units. We expect that the Class C Units will be redeemed through the issuance of
303,136
shares of Ventas common stock on or before April 1, 2016, but we have the right to redeem the Class C Units for a cash amount.
Unsecured Credit Facility and Unsecured Term Loans
Our unsecured credit facility is comprised of a
$2.0 billion
revolving credit facility priced at
LIBOR
plus
1.0%
as of
December 31, 2015
, and a
$200.0 million
fully funded term loan and an
$800.0 million
term loan (with $468.5 million outstanding), each priced at
LIBOR
plus
1.05%
as of
December 31, 2015
. The revolving credit facility matures in January 2018, but may be extended, at our option subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, for an additional period of
one
year. The
$200.0 million
and
$800.0 million
term loans mature in January 2018 and January 2019, respectively. The unsecured credit facility also includes an accordion feature that permits us to increase our aggregate borrowing capacity thereunder to up to
$3.5 billion
.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$180.7 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$14.9 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$1.8 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
In August 2015, we completed a
$900 million
five
year term loan having a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 97.5 basis points. The term loan matures in 2020.
Also in August 2015, we repaid
$305.0 million
of our
$800.0 million
unsecured term loan due 2019 and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.6 million
representing a write-off of the then unamortized deferred financing fees.
The agreement governing our unsecured credit facility requires us to comply with various financial and other restrictive covenants. See “Note 10—Borrowing Arrangements” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We were in compliance with all of these covenants at
December 31, 2015
.
Senior Notes
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$6.8 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership (“Ventas Realty”), and guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. outstanding as follows:
•
$550.0 million
principal amount of 1.55% senior notes due 2016;
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 1.250% senior notes due 2017;
•
$700.0 million
principal amount of 2.00% senior notes due 2018;
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 4.00% senior notes due 2019;
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 2.700% senior notes due 2020;
•
$700.0 million
principal amount of 4.750% senior notes due 2021;
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 4.25% senior notes due 2022;
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 3.25% senior notes due 2022;
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.750% senior notes due 2024;
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 3.500% senior notes due 2025;
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 4.125% senior notes due 2026;
•
$258.8 million
principal amount of 5.45% senior notes due 2043;
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 5.70% senior notes due 2043; and
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 4.375% senior notes due 2045.
With the exception of the senior notes due 2016, the senior notes due 2017, the senior notes due 2024, the senior notes due 2025, the senior notes due 2026, the 5.70% senior notes due 2043, and the senior notes due 2045, all of these senior notes were co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation.
71
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$75.4 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our subsidiary, Nationwide Health Properties, LLC (“NHP LLC”), as successor to NHP, outstanding as follows:
•
$52.4 million
principal amount of 6.90% senior notes due 2037 (subject to earlier repayment at the option of the holder); and
•
$23.0 million
principal amount of 6.59% senior notes due 2038 (subject to earlier repayment at the option of the holder).
In addition, as of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$650.3 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, and guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. outstanding as follows:
•
$289.0 million
(CAD 400.0 million) principal amount of 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019;
•
$180.6 million
(CAD 250.0 million) principal amount of 3.300% senior notes due 2022; and
•
$180.6 million
(CAD 250.0 million) principal amount of 4.125% senior notes, series B due 2024.
In January 2015, we issued and sold
$600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.500%
senior notes due 2025 at a public offering price equal to
99.663%
of par, for total proceeds of
$598.0 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.375%
senior notes due 2045 at a public offering price equal to
99.500%
of par, for total proceeds of
$298.5 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
Also in January 2015, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, issued and sold CAD
250.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.30%
senior notes, series C due 2022 at an offering price equal to
99.992%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
250.0 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada.
In May 2015, we repaid in full, at par,
$234.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
6%
senior notes due 2015 upon maturity.
In July 2015, we issued and sold
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.218%
of par, for total proceeds of
$496.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In September 2015, we redeemed all
$400.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our
3.125%
senior notes due November 2015 at a redemption price equal to
100.7%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.9 million
.
2014 Activity
In April 2014, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 at a public offering price equal to
99.815%
of par, for total proceeds of
$299.4 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.750%
senior notes due 2024 at a public offering price equal to
99.304%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.2
million before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In September 2014, Ventas Canada Finance Limited issued and sold CAD
400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.00%
senior notes, series A due 2019 at an offering price equal to
99.713%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
398.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses, and CAD
250.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes, series B due 2024 at an offering price equal to
99.601%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
249.0 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada.
2013 Activity
In February 2013, we repaid in full, at par,
$270.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our
6.25%
senior notes due 2013 upon maturity.
In March 2013, we issued and sold:
$258.8 million
aggregate principal amount of
5.45%
senior notes due 2043 at a public offering price equal to par, for total proceeds of
$258.8 million
before the underwriting discounts and expenses; and
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.700%
senior notes due 2020 at a public offering price equal to
99.942%
of par, for total proceeds of
$499.7 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In September 2013, we issued and sold:
$550.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
1.55%
senior notes due 2016 at a public offering price equal to
99.910%
of par, for total proceeds of
$549.5 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses; and
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
5.70%
senior notes due 2043 at a public offering price equal to
99.628%
of par, for total proceeds of
$298.9 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
72
We may, from time to time, seek to retire or purchase our outstanding senior notes for cash or in exchange for equity securities in open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. Such repurchases or exchanges, if any, will depend on prevailing market conditions, our liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions, prospects for future access to capital and other factors. The amounts involved may be material.
The indentures governing our outstanding senior notes require us to comply with various financial and other restrictive covenants. See “Note 10—Borrowing Arrangements” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We were in compliance with all of these covenants at
December 31, 2015
.
Mortgage Loan Obligations
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, our consolidated aggregate principal amount of mortgage debt outstanding was
$2.0 billion
and
$2.3 billion
, respectively, of which our share was
$1.9 billion
and
$2.2 billion
, respectively.
During 2015, we repaid in full mortgage loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$461.9 million
and a weighted average maturity of
2.1 years
and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$9.9 million
in connection with these repayments.
During 2014, we assumed or incurred mortgage debt of
$246.8 million
and repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$398.0 million
. We recognized a net loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.3 million
in connection with these repayments.
During 2013, we assumed or incurred mortgage debt of
$178.8 million
in connection with our $1.8 billion of gross investments, and we repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$493.7 million
. We recognized a net gain on extinguishment of debt of
$0.5 million
in connection with these repayments.
See “Note 4
—
Acquisitions of Real Estate Property” and “Note 10
—
Borrowing Arrangements” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Dividends
In order to continue to qualify as a REIT, we must make annual distributions to our stockholders of at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (excluding net capital gain). In
2015
, our Board of Directors declared and we paid cash dividends on our common stock aggregating
$3.04
per share, which exceeds 100% of our
2015
estimated taxable income after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards. We intend to pay dividends greater than 100% of our taxable income, after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards, for
2016
. On August 17, 2015, we also distributed a stock dividend of one CCP common share for every four shares of Ventas common stock held as of the distribution record date of August 10, 2015. The stock dividend was valued at $8.51 per Ventas share based on the opening price of CCP stock on its first day of regular-way trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
We expect that our cash flows will exceed our REIT taxable income due to depreciation and other non-cash deductions in computing REIT taxable income and that we will be able to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement. However, from time to time, we may not have sufficient cash on hand or other liquid assets to meet this requirement or we may decide to retain cash or distribute such greater amount as may be necessary to avoid income and excise taxation. If we do not have sufficient cash on hand or other liquid assets to enable us to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement, or if we desire to retain cash, we may borrow funds, issue additional equity securities, pay taxable stock dividends, if possible, distribute other property or securities or engage in a transaction intended to enable us to meet the REIT distribution requirements or any combination of the foregoing. See “Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Requirements for Qualification as a REIT—Annual Distribution Requirements” included in Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Capital Expenditures
The terms of our triple-net leases generally obligate our tenants to pay all capital expenditures necessary to maintain and improve our triple-net leased properties. However, from time to time, we may fund the capital expenditures for our triple-net leased properties through loans to the tenants or advances, which may increase the amount of rent payable with respect to the properties in certain cases. We expect to fund any capital expenditures for which we may become responsible upon expiration of our triple-net leases or in the event that our tenants are unable or unwilling to meet their obligations under those leases with cash flows from operations or through additional borrowings.
We also expect to fund capital expenditures related to our senior living operations and MOB operations reportable business segments with the cash flows from the properties or through additional borrowings. To the extent that unanticipated capital expenditure needs arise or significant borrowings are required, our liquidity may be affected adversely. Our ability to
73
borrow additional funds may be restricted in certain circumstances by the terms of the instruments governing our outstanding indebtedness.
We are party to certain agreements that obligate us to develop seniors housing or healthcare properties funded through capital that we and, in certain circumstances, our joint venture partners provide. As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
four
properties under development pursuant to these agreements, including
two
properties that are owned by an unconsolidated real estate entity. Through
December 31, 2015
, we have funded
$15.5 million
of our share of estimated total commitment over the projected development period (
$69.0 million
to
$72.9 million
) toward these projects. In addition, from time to time, we engage in redevelopment projects with respect to our existing seniors housing communities to maximize the value, increase NOI, maintain a market-competitive position, achieve property stabilization or change the primary use of the property.
Equity Offerings and Related Events
In March 2013, we established an “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program through which we could sell from time to time up to an aggregate of
$750 million
of our common stock. In January 2015, we issued and sold
3,750,202
shares of common stock under our previous ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$285.4 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$4.4 million
. In March 2015, we replaced our previous shelf registration statement that was scheduled to expire in accordance with the SEC’s rules with a new universal shelf registration statement, rendering our previous ATM program inaccessible. In connection with our new universal shelf registration statement, we established a new ATM program pursuant to which we may sell, from time to time, up to an aggregate of
$1.0 billion
of our common stock. Through the remainder of 2015 and in the first quarter of 2016 we have issued and sold a total of 5,084,302 shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of $297.0 million, after sales agent commissions of $4.5 million.
Other
We received proceeds of
$6.4 million
and
$26.2 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively, from the exercises of outstanding stock options. Future proceeds from the exercises of stock options will be affected primarily by the future trading price of our common stock and the number of options outstanding. The number of options outstanding increased to
3,051,729
as of
December 31, 2015
, from
2,460,628
as of
December 31, 2014
. The weighted average exercise price was
$52.62
as of
December 31, 2015
.
We issued approximately
19,000
shares of common stock under our Distribution Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan (“DRIP”) for net proceeds of
$1.2 million
for the year ended December 31, 2014. The DRIP was suspended effective July 3, 2014. We may determine whether or not to reinstate the DRIP at any time, in our sole discretion.
Cash Flows
The following table sets forth our sources and uses of cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease)
to Cash
2015
2014
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
$
55,348
$
94,816
$
(39,468
)
(41.6
)%
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,391,767
1,254,845
136,922
10.9
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,423,692
)
(2,055,040
)
(368,652
)
(17.9
)
Net cash provided by financing activities
1,030,122
758,057
272,065
35.9
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(522
)
2,670
(3,192
)
nm
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
53,023
$
55,348
(2,325
)
(4.2
)
nm—not meaningful
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Cash flows from operating activities
increased
in
2015
over the prior year primarily due to 2014 and 2015 acquisitions, payments received from tenants in 2015 and increases in fee income, partially offset by increased merger-related expenses and deal costs and a full year’s results in 2014 from the properties that were spun off to CCP.
74
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Cash used in investing activities during
2015
and
2014
consisted primarily of cash paid for our investments in real estate (
$2.7 billion
and
$1.5 billion
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), investments in loans receivable (
$171.1 million
and
$499.0 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), purchase of marketable securities (
$96.7 million
in
2014
), capital expenditures (
$107.5 million
and
$87.5 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), development project expenditures (
$119.7 million
and
$107.0 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively) and investment in unconsolidated operating entity (
$26.3 million
in
2015
). These uses were partially offset by proceeds from loans receivable (
$109.2 million
and
$73.6 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), proceeds from the sale or maturity of marketable debt securities (
$76.8 million
and
$21.7 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), and proceeds from real estate dispositions (
$492.4 million
and
$118.2 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively).
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Cash provided by financing activities during
2015
and
2014
consisted primarily of net borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility (
$540.2 million
in
2014
), net proceeds from the issuance of debt (
$2.5 billion
and
$2.0 billion
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), proceeds of debt related to the CCP Spin-Off (
$1.4 billion
in
2015
) and net proceeds from the issuance of common stock (
$491.0 million
and
$242.1 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively). These cash inflows were partially offset by debt repayments (
$1.4 billion
and
$1.2 billion
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), cash distributions to common stockholders, unitholders and noncontrolling interest parties (
$1.0 billion
and
$890.9 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively), net payments made on our unsecured revolving credit facility (
$723.5 million
in
2015
), net cash impact of the CCP Spin-Off (
$128.7 million
in
2015
) and payments for deferred financing costs (
$24.7 million
and
$14.2 million
in
2015
and
2014
, respectively).
Contractual Obligations
The following table summarizes the effect that minimum debt (which includes principal and interest payments) and other material noncancelable commitments are expected to have on our cash flow in future periods as of
December 31, 2015
:
Total
Less than 1
year (4)
1 - 3 years (5)
3 - 5 years (6)
More than 5
years (7)
(In thousands)
Long-term debt obligations (1) (2) (3)
$
14,603,925
$
1,020,977
$
2,770,287
$
3,867,824
$
6,944,837
Operating obligations, including ground lease obligations
629,512
31,346
44,840
33,372
519,954
Total
$
15,233,437
$
1,052,323
$
2,815,127
$
3,901,196
$
7,464,791
(1)
Amounts represent contractual amounts due, including interest.
(2)
Interest on variable rate debt was based on forward rates obtained as of
December 31, 2015
.
(3)
Excludes
$22.9 million
of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
that is scheduled to mature in 2016 and 2017.
(4)
Includes
$550.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 1.55% senior notes due 2016.
(5)
Includes
$300.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 1.250% senior notes due 2017,
$180.7 million
of borrowings outstanding on our unsecured revolving credit facility,
$700.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 2.00% senior notes due 2018 and
$200.0 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2018.
(6)
Includes
$468.5 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2019,
$600.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 4.00% senior notes due 2019,
$289.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019,
$500.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 2.700% senior notes due 2020 and
$900.0 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2020.
(7)
Includes
$4.6 billion
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our senior notes maturing between 2021 and 2045.
$52.4 million
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our 6.90% senior notes due 2037 are subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on October 1 in each of 2017 and 2027, and
$23.0 million
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our 6.59% senior notes due 2038 are subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$24.1 million
of unrecognized tax benefits that are excluded from the table above, as we are unable to make a reasonable reliable estimate of the period of cash settlement, if any, with the respective tax authority.
75
ITEM 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
The information set forth in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Asset/Liability Management” is incorporated by reference into this Item 7A.
76
ITEM 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Ventas, Inc.
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules
Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
78
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
79
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
80
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedule
s
Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
141
Schedule III—Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
142
Schedule IV—Real Estate Mortgage Loans
184
77
MANAGEMENT REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act of 1934. This system is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting is not intended to provide absolute assurance that a misstatement of our financial statements would be prevented or detected.
Management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria set forth in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on this assessment, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2015.
The effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015 has been audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report included herein.
78
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Stockholders and Board of Directors
Ventas, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Ventas, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2015. In connection with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have audited the information in financial statement schedules II, III and IV. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Ventas, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2015, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedules II, III and IV, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has changed its method of accounting for discontinued operations in 2014 due to the adoption of Accounting Standards Update 2014-08,
Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Ventas, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated February 12, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ KPMG LLP
February 12, 2016
79
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Stockholders and Board of Directors
Ventas, Inc.:
We have audited Ventas, Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the Company) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management Report on the Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Ventas Inc. and subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2015, respectively, and our report dated February 12, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. Our report refers to a change in the method of accounting for discontinued operations.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 12, 2016
80
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
2015
2014
(In thousands, except per
share amounts)
Assets
Real estate investments:
Land and improvements
$
2,056,428
$
1,711,654
Buildings and improvements
20,309,599
17,420,392
Construction in progress
92,005
109,689
Acquired lease intangibles
1,344,422
955,035
23,802,454
20,196,770
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
(4,177,234
)
(3,423,780
)
Net real estate property
19,625,220
16,772,990
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
857,112
802,881
Investments in unconsolidated real estate entities
95,707
91,872
Net real estate investments
20,578,039
17,667,743
Cash and cash equivalents
53,023
55,348
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
77,896
71,771
Goodwill
1,047,497
363,971
Assets held for sale
93,060
2,555,322
Other assets
412,403
451,758
Total assets
$
22,261,918
$
21,165,913
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
11,206,996
$
10,844,351
Accrued interest
80,864
62,182
Accounts payable and other liabilities
779,380
750,657
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
34,340
237,973
Deferred income taxes
338,382
344,337
Total liabilities
12,439,962
12,239,500
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
196,529
172,016
Commitments and contingencies
Equity:
Ventas stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; 10,000 shares authorized, unissued
—
—
Common stock, $0.25 par value; 600,000 shares authorized, 334,386 and 298,478 shares issued at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively
83,579
74,656
Capital in excess of par value
11,602,838
10,119,306
Accumulated other comprehensive income
(7,565
)
13,121
Retained earnings (deficit)
(2,111,958
)
(1,526,388
)
Treasury stock, 44 and 7 shares at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively
(2,567
)
(511
)
Total Ventas stockholders’ equity
9,564,327
8,680,184
Noncontrolling interest
61,100
74,213
Total equity
9,625,427
8,754,397
Total liabilities and equity
$
22,261,918
$
21,165,913
See accompanying notes.
81
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands, except per share
amounts)
Revenues:
Rental income:
Triple-net leased
$
779,801
$
674,547
$
586,016
Medical office buildings
566,245
463,910
450,340
1,346,046
1,138,457
1,036,356
Resident fees and services
1,811,255
1,552,951
1,406,005
Medical office building and other services revenue
41,492
29,364
17,809
Income from loans and investments
86,553
51,778
54,425
Interest and other income
1,052
4,263
2,022
Total revenues
3,286,398
2,776,813
2,516,617
Expenses:
Interest
367,114
292,065
249,009
Depreciation and amortization
894,057
725,216
629,908
Property-level operating expenses:
Senior living
1,209,415
1,036,556
956,684
Medical office buildings
174,225
158,832
153,241
1,383,640
1,195,388
1,109,925
Medical office building services costs
26,565
17,092
8,315
General, administrative and professional fees
128,035
121,738
115,083
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
14,411
5,564
1,201
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
102,944
43,304
21,634
Other
17,957
25,743
17,364
Total expenses
2,934,723
2,426,110
2,152,439
Income before loss from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
351,675
350,703
364,178
Loss from unconsolidated entities
(1,420
)
(139
)
(508
)
Income tax benefit
39,284
8,732
11,828
Income from continuing operations
389,539
359,296
375,498
Discontinued operations
11,103
99,735
79,171
Gain on real estate dispositions
18,580
17,970
—
Net income
419,222
477,001
454,669
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,379
1,234
1,160
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
$
453,509
Earnings per common share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.23
$
1.28
$
1.28
Discontinued operations
0.03
0.34
0.27
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.26
$
1.62
$
1.55
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.22
$
1.26
$
1.27
Discontinued operations
0.03
0.34
0.27
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.25
$
1.60
$
1.54
Weighted average shares used in computing earnings per common share:
Basic
330,311
294,175
292,654
Diluted
334,007
296,677
295,110
See accompanying notes.
82
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Net income
$
419,222
$
477,001
$
454,669
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation
(14,792
)
(17,153
)
(5,422
)
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
(5,047
)
7,001
(1,023
)
Other
(847
)
3,614
2,750
Total other comprehensive loss
(20,686
)
(6,538
)
(3,695
)
Comprehensive income
398,536
470,463
450,974
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,379
1,234
1,160
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
397,157
$
469,229
$
449,814
See accompanying notes.
83
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
Common
Stock Par
Value
Capital in
Excess of
Par Value
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
Retained
Earnings
(Deficit)
Treasury
Stock
Total Ventas
Stockholders’
Equity
Non- controlling
Interest
Total Equity
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Balance at January 1, 2013
$
73,904
$
9,920,962
$
23,354
$
(777,927
)
$
(221,165
)
$
9,019,128
$
70,235
$
9,089,363
Net income (loss)
—
—
—
453,509
—
453,509
1,160
454,669
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(3,695
)
—
—
(3,695
)
—
(3,695
)
Acquisition-related activity
—
(762
)
—
—
—
(762
)
12,717
11,955
Net change in noncontrolling interest
—
—
—
—
—
—
(7,982
)
(7,982
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$2.735 per share
—
—
—
(802,123
)
—
(802,123
)
—
(802,123
)
Issuance of common stock
517
140,826
—
—
—
141,343
—
141,343
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
19
5,983
—
—
6,638
12,640
—
12,640
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interest
—
(13,751
)
—
—
—
(13,751
)
3,400
(10,351
)
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
8,683
—
—
—
8,683
—
8,683
Purchase of OP units
—
(579
)
—
—
502
(77
)
—
(77
)
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
48
17,230
—
—
(7,892
)
9,386
—
9,386
Balance at December 31, 2013
74,488
10,078,592
19,659
(1,126,541
)
(221,917
)
8,824,281
79,530
8,903,811
Net income (loss)
—
—
—
475,767
—
475,767
1,234
477,001
Other comprehensive income
—
—
(6,538
)
—
—
(6,538
)
—
(6,538
)
Retirement of stock
(924
)
(220,152
)
—
—
221,076
—
—
—
Acquisition-related activity
37
10,141
—
—
—
10,178
—
10,178
Net change in noncontrolling interest
—
1,163
—
—
—
1,163
(8,477
)
(7,314
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$2.965 per share
—
—
—
(875,614
)
—
(875,614
)
—
(875,614
)
Issuance of common stock
845
241,262
—
—
—
242,107
—
242,107
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
173
29,266
—
—
3,858
33,297
—
33,297
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interest
—
(1,082
)
—
—
—
(1,082
)
1,926
844
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
(32,993
)
—
—
—
(32,993
)
—
(32,993
)
Purchase of OP units
1
(83
)
—
—
—
(82
)
—
(82
)
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
36
13,192
—
—
(3,528
)
9,700
—
9,700
Balance at December 31, 2014
74,656
10,119,306
13,121
(1,526,388
)
(511
)
8,680,184
74,213
8,754,397
Net income
—
—
—
417,843
—
417,843
1,379
419,222
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(20,686
)
—
—
(20,686
)
—
(20,686
)
Acquisition-related activity
7,103
2,209,202
—
—
—
2,216,305
853
2,217,158
Impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
(1,247,356
)
—
—
—
(1,247,356
)
(4,717
)
(1,252,073
)
Net change in noncontrolling interest
—
—
—
—
—
—
(12,530
)
(12,530
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$3.04 per share
—
—
—
(1,003,413
)
—
(1,003,413
)
—
(1,003,413
)
Issuance of common stock
1,797
489,227
—
—
—
491,024
—
491,024
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
23
6,068
—
—
5,945
12,036
—
12,036
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interest
—
(374
)
—
—
—
(374
)
1,902
1,528
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
7,831
—
—
—
7,831
—
7,831
Purchase of OP units
—
1,719
—
—
—
1,719
—
1,719
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
—
17,215
—
—
(8,001
)
9,214
—
9,214
Balance at December 31, 2015
$
83,579
$
11,602,838
$
(7,565
)
$
(2,111,958
)
$
(2,567
)
$
9,564,327
$
61,100
$
9,625,427
See accompanying notes.
84
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income
$
419,222
$
477,001
$
454,669
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization (including amounts in discontinued operations)
973,663
828,467
769,881
Amortization of deferred revenue and lease intangibles, net
(24,129
)
(18,871
)
(15,793
)
Other non-cash amortization
5,448
(312
)
(16,745
)
Stock-based compensation
19,537
20,994
20,653
Straight-lining of rental income, net
(33,792
)
(38,687
)
(30,540
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
14,411
5,564
1,048
Gain on real estate dispositions (including amounts in discontinued operations)
(18,811
)
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
Gain on real estate loan investments
—
(1,455
)
(5,056
)
Gain on sale of marketable securities
(5,800
)
—
(856
)
Income tax benefit (including amounts in discontinued operations)
(42,384
)
(9,431
)
(11,828
)
Loss from unconsolidated entities
1,244
139
1,748
Loss (gain) on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
176
—
(1,241
)
Distributions from unconsolidated entities
23,462
6,508
6,641
Other
6,517
9,416
1,986
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Decrease (increase) in other assets
42,316
5,317
(690
)
Increase in accrued interest
19,995
7,958
6,806
(Decrease) increase in accounts payable and other liabilities
(9,308
)
(18,580
)
17,689
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,391,767
1,254,845
1,194,755
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(2,650,788
)
(1,468,286
)
(1,437,002
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
(171,144
)
(498,992
)
(37,963
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
492,408
118,246
35,591
Proceeds from loans receivable
109,176
73,557
325,518
Purchase of marketable securities
—
(96,689
)
—
Proceeds from sale or maturity of marketable securities
76,800
21,689
5,493
Funds held in escrow for future development expenditures
4,003
4,590
19,458
Development project expenditures
(119,674
)
(106,988
)
(95,741
)
Capital expenditures
(107,487
)
(87,454
)
(81,614
)
Investment in unconsolidated operating entity
(26,282
)
—
—
Contributions to unconsolidated entities
(30,704
)
(5,598
)
(2,169
)
Other
—
(9,115
)
(14,331
)
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,423,692
)
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under credit facilities
(723,457
)
540,203
(164,029
)
Net cash impact of CCP Spin-Off
(128,749
)
—
—
Proceeds from debt
2,512,747
2,007,707
2,767,546
Proceeds from debt related to CCP Spin-Off
1,400,000
—
—
Repayment of debt
(1,435,596
)
(1,151,395
)
(1,792,492
)
Purchase of noncontrolling interest
(3,819
)
—
—
Payment of deferred financing costs
(24,665
)
(14,220
)
(31,277
)
Issuance of common stock, net
491,023
242,107
141,343
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(1,003,413
)
(875,614
)
(802,123
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(15,095
)
(5,762
)
(5,040
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
(33,188
)
(503
)
(659
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
—
491
2,395
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
(12,649
)
(9,559
)
(9,286
)
Other
6,983
24,602
8,618
Net cash provided by financing activities
1,030,122
758,057
114,996
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
(1,803
)
(42,138
)
26,991
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(522
)
2,670
(83
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
55,348
94,816
67,908
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
53,023
$
55,348
$
94,816
85
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Interest paid including swap payments and receipts
$
391,699
$
361,144
$
338,311
Supplemental schedule of non-cash activities:
Assets and liabilities assumed from acquisitions:
Real estate investments
$
2,565,960
$
370,741
$
223,955
Utilization of funds held for an Internal Revenue Code Section 1031 exchange
(8,911
)
—
—
Other assets acquired
20,090
15,280
6,635
Debt assumed
177,857
241,076
183,848
Other liabilities
54,459
24,039
29,868
Deferred income tax liability
52,153
110,728
5,181
Noncontrolling interests
88,085
—
11,693
Equity issued
2,204,585
10,178
—
Non-cash impact of CCP Spin-Off
1,256,404
—
—
See accompanying notes.
86
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1—Description of Business
Ventas, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, unless otherwise indicated or except where the context otherwise requires, “we,” “us” or “our”), an S&P 500 company, is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2015
, we owned approximately
1,300
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals, and we had
four
properties under development, including
two
properties that are owned by an unconsolidated real estate entity. Our company was originally founded in 1983 and is currently headquartered in Chicago, Illinois. As further discussed in “Note 5—Dispositions”, in August 2015 we completed the spin-off of most of our post-acute/skilled nursing facility portfolio into an independent, publicly traded REIT named Care Capital Properties, Inc. (“CCP”) (the “CCP Spin-Off”). The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2015
, we leased a total of
607
properties (excluding MOBs and properties classified as held for sale) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and we engaged independent operators, such as Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) and Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”), to manage
304
seniors housing communities for us pursuant to long-term management agreements. Our three largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”), Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) and Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) leased from us
140
properties (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement),
76
properties and
ten
properties, respectively, as of
December 31, 2015
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Lillibridge”) subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC (“PMBRES”), we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
Note 2—Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements include our accounts and the accounts of our wholly owned subsidiaries and the joint venture entities over which we exercise control. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation, and our net earnings are reduced by the portion of net earnings attributable to noncontrolling interests.
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires us to identify entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights and to determine which business enterprise is the primary beneficiary of variable interest entities (“VIEs”). A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; and (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. We consolidate our investment in a VIE when we determine that we are its primary beneficiary. We may change our original assessment of a VIE upon subsequent events such as the modification of contractual arrangements that affects the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposition of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.
We identify the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. We perform this analysis on an ongoing basis.
87
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
As it relates to investments in joint ventures, GAAP may preclude consolidation by the sole general partner in certain circumstances based on the type of rights held by the limited partner(s). We assess limited partners’ rights and their impact on the presumption of control of the limited partnership by the sole general partner when an investor becomes the sole general partner, and we reassess if there is a change to the terms or in the exercisability of the rights of the limited partners, the sole general partner increases or decreases its ownership of limited partnership interests, or there is an increase or decrease in the number of outstanding limited partnership interests. We also apply this guidance to managing member interests in limited liability companies.
Investments in Unconsolidated Entities
We report investments in unconsolidated entities over whose operating and financial policies we have the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method of accounting. Under this method of accounting, our share of the investee’s earnings or losses is included in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
We base the initial carrying value of investments in unconsolidated entities on the fair value of the assets at the time we acquired the joint venture interest. We estimate fair values for our equity method investments based on discounted cash flow models that include all estimated cash inflows and outflows over a specified holding period and, where applicable, any estimated debt premiums or discounts. The capitalization rates, discount rates and credit spreads we use in these models are based upon assumptions that we believe to be within a reasonable range of current market rates for the respective investments.
We generally amortize any difference between our cost basis and the basis reflected at the joint venture level, if any, over the lives of the related assets and liabilities and include that amortization in our share of income or loss from unconsolidated entities. For earnings of equity method investments with pro rata distribution allocations, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on their respective stated ownership percentages. In other instances, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on the hypothetical liquidation at book value method (the “HLBV method”). Under the HLBV method, net income or loss is allocated between the partners based on the difference between each partner’s claim on the net assets of the joint venture at the end and beginning of the period, after taking into account contributions and distributions. Each partner’s share of the net assets of the joint venture is calculated as the amount that the partner would receive if the joint venture were to liquidate all of its assets at net book value and distribute the resulting cash to creditors and partners in accordance with their respective priorities. Under this method, in any given period, we could record more or less income than the joint venture has generated, than actual cash distributions received or than the amount we may receive in the event of an actual liquidation.
Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
We own a majority interest in NHP/PMB L.P. (“NHP/PMB”), a limited partnership formed in 2008 to acquire properties from entities affiliated with Pacific Medical Buildings LLC. We consolidate NHP/PMB, as our wholly owned subsidiary is the general partner and exercises control of the partnership. As of
December 31, 2015
, third party investors owned
2,812,318
Class A limited partnership units in NHP/PMB (“OP Units”), which represented
28.9%
of the total units then outstanding, and we owned
6,917,009
Class B limited partnership units in NHP/PMB, representing the remaining
71.1%
. At any time following the first anniversary of the date of their issuance, the OP Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for cash or, at our option,
0.9051
shares of our common stock per unit, as adjusted from
0.7866
shares of common stock per unit in connection with the CCP Spin-Off, and subject to further adjustment in certain circumstances. We are party by assumption to a registration rights agreement with the holders of the OP Units that requires us, subject to the terms and conditions and certain exceptions set forth therein, to file and maintain a registration statement relating to the issuance of shares of our common stock upon redemption of OP Units.
On January 16, 2015, in connection with our acquisition of American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”), each of the
7,057,271
issued and outstanding limited partnership units of American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. (subsequently renamed Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. (“Ventas Realty OP”)), a limited partnership in which HCT was the sole general partner prior to the acquisition, was converted into a newly created class of limited partnership units (“Class C Units”) at the
0.1688
exchange ratio payable to HCT stockholders in the acquisition, net of any Class C Units withheld to pay taxes. We consolidate Ventas Realty OP, as our wholly owned subsidiary is the general partner and exercises control of the partnership. The Class C Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for one share of our common stock per unit or, at our option, an equivalent amount in cash, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. We are party by assumption to a registration rights agreement with the holders of the Class C Units that requires us, subject to the terms and conditions and certain exceptions set forth therein, to file and maintain a registration statement relating to the issuance of shares of our common stock upon redemption of Class C Units. As of
December 31, 2015
, third party investors owned
672,984
Class C Units, which represented
2.3%
of the total units then outstanding, and we owned
88
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
28,550,812
Class C Units and
176,374
OP units in Ventas Realty OP, representing the remaining
97.7%
. In April 2015, third party investors redeemed
445,541
Class C Units for approximately
$32.6 million
.
As redemption rights are outside of our control, the redeemable OP unitholder interests are classified outside of permanent equity on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We reflect the redeemable OP unitholder interests at the greater of cost or fair value. As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, the fair value of the redeemable OP unitholder interests was
$188.5 million
and
$159.1 million
, respectively. We recognize changes in fair value through capital in excess of par value, net of cash distributions paid and purchases by us of any OP Units. Our diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) includes the effect of any potential shares outstanding from redemption of the OP Units.
Beginning on January 16, 2016 and as of February 10, 2016, third party investors executed redemption right exercise notices for Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. to redeem
303,136
Class C Units. We expect that the Class C Units will be redeemed through the issuance of
303,136
shares of Ventas common stock on or before April 1, 2016, but we have the right to redeem the Class C Units for a cash amount.
Certain noncontrolling interests of other consolidated joint ventures were also classified as redeemable at
December 31, 2015
and
2014
. Accordingly, we record the carrying amount of these noncontrolling interests at the greater of their initial carrying amount (increased or decreased for the noncontrolling interest’s share of net income or loss and distributions) or the redemption value. Our joint venture partners have certain redemption rights with respect to their noncontrolling interests in these joint ventures that are outside of our control, and the redeemable noncontrolling interests are classified outside of permanent equity on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize changes in carrying value of redeemable noncontrolling interests through capital in excess of par value.
Noncontrolling Interests
Excluding the redeemable noncontrolling interests described above, we present the portion of any equity that we do not own in entities that we control (and thus consolidate) as noncontrolling interests and classify those interests as a component of consolidated equity, separate from total Ventas stockholders’ equity, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. For consolidated joint ventures with pro rata distribution allocations, net income or loss is allocated between the joint venture partners based on their respective stated ownership percentages. In other instances, net income or loss is allocated between the joint venture partners based on the HLBV method. We account for purchases or sales of equity interests that do not result in a change of control as equity transactions, through capital in excess of par value. In addition, we include net income attributable to the noncontrolling interests in net income in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Accounting Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions regarding future events that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Business Combinations
We account for acquisitions using the acquisition method and record the cost of the businesses acquired among tangible and recognized intangible assets and liabilities based upon their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. Recognized intangibles primarily include the value of in-place leases, acquired lease contracts, tenant and customer relationships, trade names/trademarks and goodwill. We do not amortize goodwill, which represents the excess of the purchase price paid over the fair value of the net assets of the acquired business and is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We estimate the fair value of buildings acquired on an as-if-vacant basis, or replacement cost basis and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, generally not to exceed
35
years. We determine the fair value of other fixed assets, such as site improvements and furniture, fixtures and equipment, based upon the replacement cost and depreciate such value over the assets’ estimated remaining useful lives as determined at the applicable acquisition date. We determine the value of land either by considering the sales prices of similar properties in recent transactions or based on internal analyses of recently acquired and existing comparable properties within our portfolio. We generally determine the value of construction in progress based upon the replacement cost. However, for certain acquired properties that are part of a ground-up development, we determine fair value by using the same valuation approach as for all other properties and deducting the estimated cost to complete the development. During the remaining construction period, we capitalize interest expense until the development has reached substantial completion. Construction in progress, including capitalized interest, is not depreciated until the development has reached substantial completion.
89
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The fair value of acquired lease-related intangibles, if any, reflects: (i) the estimated value of any above and/or below market leases, determined by discounting the difference between the estimated market rent and in-place lease rent; and (ii) the estimated value of in-place leases related to the cost to obtain tenants, including leasing commissions, and an estimated value of the absorption period to reflect the value of the rent and recovery costs foregone during a reasonable lease-up period as if the acquired space was vacant. We amortize any acquired lease-related intangibles to revenue or amortization expense over the remaining life of the associated lease plus any assumed bargain renewal periods. If a lease is terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed upon expiration, we recognize all unamortized amounts of lease-related intangibles associated with that lease in operations at that time.
We estimate the fair value of purchase option intangible assets and liabilities, if any, by discounting the difference between the applicable property’s acquisition date fair value and an estimate of its future option price. We do not amortize the resulting intangible asset or liability over the term of the lease, but rather adjust the recognized value of the asset or liability upon sale.
We estimate the fair value of tenant or other customer relationships acquired, if any, by considering the nature and extent of existing business relationships with the tenant or customer, growth prospects for developing new business with the tenant or customer, the tenant’s credit quality, expectations of lease renewals with the tenant, and the potential for significant, additional future leasing arrangements with the tenant, and we amortize that value over the expected life of the associated arrangements or leases, including the remaining terms of the related leases and any expected renewal periods. We estimate the fair value of trade names and trademarks using a royalty rate methodology and amortize that value over the estimated useful life of the trade name or trademark.
In connection with a business combination, we may assume rights and obligations under certain lease agreements pursuant to which we become the lessee of a given property. We assume the lease classification previously determined by the prior lessee absent a modification in the assumed lease agreement. We assess assumed operating leases, including ground leases, to determine whether the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us given current market conditions on the acquisition date. To the extent the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us relative to market conditions on the acquisition date, we recognize an intangible asset or liability at fair value and amortize that asset or liability to interest or rental expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income over the applicable lease term. We include all lease-related intangible assets and liabilities within acquired lease intangibles and accounts payable and other liabilities, respectively, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We determine the fair value of loans receivable acquired in connection with a business combination by discounting the estimated future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans with the same terms and length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings. We do not establish a valuation allowance at the acquisition date because the estimated future cash flows already reflect our judgment regarding their uncertainty. We recognize the difference between the acquisition date fair value and the total expected cash flows as interest income using an effective interest method over the life of the applicable loan. Subsequent to the acquisition date, we evaluate changes regarding the uncertainty of future cash flows and the need for a valuation allowance, as appropriate.
We estimate the fair value of noncontrolling interests assumed consistent with the manner in which we value all of the underlying assets and liabilities.
We calculate the fair value of long-term debt by discounting the remaining contractual cash flows on each instrument at the current market rate for those borrowings, which we approximate based on the rate at which we would expect to incur a replacement instrument on the date of acquisition, and recognize any fair value adjustments related to long-term debt as effective yield adjustments over the remaining term of the instrument.
Impairment of Long-Lived and Intangible Assets
We periodically evaluate our long-lived assets, primarily consisting of investments in real estate, for impairment indicators. If indicators of impairment are present, we evaluate the carrying value of the related real estate investments in relation to the future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying operations. In performing this evaluation, we consider market conditions and our current intentions with respect to holding or disposing of the asset. We adjust the net book value of leased properties and other long-lived assets to fair value if the sum of the expected future undiscounted cash flows, including sales proceeds, is less than book value. We recognize an impairment loss at the time we make any such determination.
If impairment indicators arise with respect to intangible assets with finite useful lives, we evaluate impairment by comparing the carrying amount of the asset to the estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If estimated future undiscounted net cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, then we estimate the fair
90
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
value of the asset and compare the estimated fair value to the intangible asset’s carrying value. We recognize any shortfall from carrying value as an impairment loss in the current period.
We evaluate our investments in unconsolidated entities for impairment at least annually, and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our investment may exceed its fair value. If we determine that a decline in the fair value of our investment in an unconsolidated entity is other-than-temporary, and if such reduced fair value is below the carrying value, we record an impairment.
We test goodwill for impairment at least annually, and more frequently if indicators arise. We first assess qualitative factors, such as current macroeconomic conditions, state of the equity and capital markets and our overall financial and operating performance, to determine the likelihood that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If we determine it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we proceed with the two-step approach to evaluating impairment. First, we estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and compare it to the reporting unit’s carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds fair value, we proceed with the second step, which requires us to assign the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit as if it had been acquired in a business combination at the date of the impairment test. The excess fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to the assets and liabilities is the implied value of goodwill and is used to determine the amount of impairment. We recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying value of goodwill exceeds the implied value in the current period.
Estimates of fair value used in our evaluation of goodwill (if necessary based on our qualitative assessment), investments in real estate, investments in unconsolidated entities and intangible assets are based upon discounted future cash flow projections or other acceptable valuation techniques that are based, in turn, upon all available evidence including level three inputs, such as revenue and expense growth rates, estimates of future cash flows, capitalization rates, discount rates, general economic conditions and trends, or other available market data. Our ability to accurately predict future operating results and cash flows and to estimate and allocate fair values impacts the timing and recognition of impairments. While we believe our assumptions are reasonable, changes in these assumptions may have a material impact on our financial results.
Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations
We sell properties from time to time for various reasons, including favorable market conditions or the exercise of purchase options by tenants. We classify certain long-lived assets as held for sale once the criteria, as defined by GAAP, has been met. Long-lived assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value minus cost to sell and are no longer depreciated. We report discontinued operations when the following criteria are met: (1) a component of an entity or group of components that has been disposed of or classified as held for sale and represents a strategic shift that has or will have a major effect on an entity’s operations and financial results; or (2) an acquired business that is classified as held for sale on the acquisition date. Assets relating to the CCP Spin-Off were reported as discontinued operations once the transaction was completed. The results of operations for assets meeting the definition of discontinued operations are reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Income as discontinued operations for all periods presented. We allocate estimated interest expense to discontinued operations based on property values and our weighted average interest rate or the property’s actual mortgage interest.
Loans Receivable
We record loans receivable, other than those acquired in connection with a business combination, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets (either in secured loans receivable and investments, net or other assets, in the case of non-mortgage loans receivable) at the unpaid principal balance, net of any deferred origination fees, purchase discounts or premiums and valuation allowances. We amortize net deferred origination fees, which are comprised of loan fees collected from the borrower net of certain direct costs, and purchase discounts or premiums over the contractual life of the loan using the effective interest method and immediately recognize in income any unamortized balances if the loan is repaid before its contractual maturity.
We regularly evaluate the collectibility of loans receivable based on factors such as corporate and facility-level financial and operational reports, compliance with financial covenants set forth in the applicable loan agreement, the financial strength of the borrower and any guarantor, the payment history of the borrower and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due under the terms of the applicable loan agreement, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be collected.
Cash Equivalents
Cash equivalents consist of highly liquid investments with a maturity date of three months or less when purchased. These investments are stated at cost, which approximates fair value.
91
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Escrow Deposits and Restricted Cash
Escrow deposits consist of amounts held by us or our lenders to provide for future real estate tax, insurance expenditures and tenant improvements related to our properties and operations. Restricted cash represents amounts paid to us for security deposits and other similar purposes.
Deferred Financing Costs
We amortize deferred financing costs, which are reported within senior notes payable and other debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, as a component of interest expense over the terms of the related borrowings using a method that approximates a level yield. Amortized costs of approximately
$18.7 million
,
$16.9 million
and
$13.5 million
were included in interest expense for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, respectively.
Marketable Debt and Equity Securities
We record marketable debt and equity securities as available-for-sale and classify them as a component of other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets (other than our interests in government-sponsored pooled loan investments, which are classified as secured loans receivable and investments, net on our Consolidated Balance Sheets). We record these securities at fair value and include unrealized gains and losses recorded in stockholders’ equity as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We report interest income, including discount or premium amortization, on marketable debt securities and gains or losses on securities sold, which are based on the specific identification method, in income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Derivative Instruments
We recognize all derivative instruments in other assets or accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value as of the reporting date. We recognize changes in the fair value of derivative instruments in other expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Income or accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, depending on the intended use of the derivative and our designation of the instrument.
We do not use our derivative financial instruments, including interest rate caps, interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts, for trading or speculative purposes. Our foreign currency forward contracts and certain of our interest rate swaps (including the interest rate swap contracts of unconsolidated joint ventures) are designated as effectively hedging the variability of expected cash flows related to their underlying securities and, therefore, also are recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, with changes in the fair value of these instruments recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize our proportionate share of the change in fair value of swap contracts of our unconsolidated joint ventures in accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Certain of our other interest rate swaps and rate caps were not designated as having a hedging relationship with the underlying securities and therefore do not meet the criteria for hedge accounting under GAAP. Accordingly, these interest rate swaps are recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, and we recognize changes in the fair value of these instruments in current earnings (in other expenses) in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments
Fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement, and we determine fair value based on the assumptions that we expect market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, GAAP 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 that are classified within levels one and two of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within level three of the hierarchy).
Level one inputs utilize unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. Level two inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in level one that are directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability. Level two inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets and other inputs for the asset or liability that are observable at commonly quoted intervals, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates and yield curves. Level three inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which typically are based on our own assumptions, because there is little, if any, related market activity. If the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the hierarchy, the level within which the entire fair value measurement falls is the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. If the volume and level of market activity for an asset or liability has decreased significantly relative to the normal market activity for such asset or liability (or similar assets or liabilities), then transactions or quoted prices may not accurately reflect fair value. In addition, if there is evidence that a transaction for an asset or liability is not orderly, little, if any, weight is placed on that transaction price as an
92
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
indicator of fair value. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.
We use the following methods and assumptions in estimating the fair value of our financial instruments.
•
Cash and cash equivalents -
The carrying amount of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents reported on our Consolidated Balance Sheets approximates fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments.
•
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
- The carrying amount of escrow deposits and restricted cash reported on our Consolidated Balance Sheets approximates fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments.
•
Loans receivable -
We estimate the fair value of loans receivable using level two and level three inputs: we discount future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans with the same terms and length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings.
•
Marketable debt securities -
We estimate the fair value of corporate bonds using level two inputs: we observe quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. We estimate the fair value of certain government-sponsored pooled loan investments using level three inputs: we consider credit spreads, underlying asset performance and credit quality, default rates and any other applicable criteria.
•
Derivative instruments -
With the assistance of a third party, we estimate the fair value of derivative instruments, including interest rate caps, interest rate swaps, and foreign currency forward contracts using level two inputs: for interest rate caps, we observe forward yield curves and other relevant information; for interest rate swaps, we observe alternative financing rates derived from market-based financing rates, forward yield curves and discount rates; and for foreign currency forward contracts, we estimate the future values of the two currency tranches using forward exchange rates that are based on traded forward points and calculate a present value of the net amount using a discount factor based on observable traded interest rates.
•
Senior notes payable and other debt -
We estimate the fair value of senior notes payable and other debt using level two inputs: we discount the future cash flows using current interest rates at which we could obtain similar borrowings. For mortgage debt, we may estimate fair value using level three inputs.
•
Redeemable OP unitholder interests -
We estimate the fair value of our redeemable OP unitholder interests using level one inputs: we base fair value on the closing price of our common stock, as OP Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for cash or, at our option, shares of our common stock, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances.
Revenue Recognition
Triple-Net Leased Properties and MOB Operations
Certain of our triple-net leases and most of our MOB leases provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent. We recognize base rental revenues under these leases on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term when collectability is reasonably assured. Recognizing rental income on a straight-line basis generally results in recognized revenues during the first half of a lease term exceeding the cash amounts contractually due from our tenants, creating a straight-line rent receivable that is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. At
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, this cumulative excess totaled
$219.1 million
(net of allowances of
$101.4 million
) and
$187.6 million
(net of allowances of
$83.5 million
), respectively (excluding properties classified as held for sale).
Certain of our leases provide for periodic increases in base rent only if certain revenue parameters or other substantive contingencies are met. We recognize the increased rental revenue under these leases as the related parameters or contingencies are met, rather than on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term.
Senior Living Operations
We recognize resident fees and services, other than move-in fees, monthly as services are provided. We recognize move-in fees on a straight-line basis over the average resident stay. Our lease agreements with residents generally have terms of
12
to
18
months and are cancelable by the resident upon
30
days’ notice.
Other
We recognize interest income from loans and investments, including discounts and premiums, using the effective interest method when collectibility is reasonably assured. We apply the effective interest method on a loan-by-loan basis and recognize discounts and premiums as yield adjustments over the related loan term. We recognize interest income on an impaired loan to
93
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
the extent our estimate of the fair value of the collateral is sufficient to support the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest. When the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest is equal to or less than our estimate of the fair value of the collateral, we recognize interest income on a cash basis. We provide a reserve against an impaired loan to the extent our total investment in the loan exceeds our estimate of the fair value of the loan collateral.
We recognize income from rent, lease termination fees, development services, management advisory services, and all other income when all of the following criteria are met in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Staff Accounting Bulletin 104: (i) the applicable agreement has been fully executed and delivered; (ii) services have been rendered; (iii) the amount is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectibility is reasonably assured.
Allowances
We assess the collectibility of our rent receivables, including straight-line rent receivables. We base our assessment of the collectibility of rent receivables (other than straight-line rent receivables) on several factors, including, among other things, payment history, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to recover the full value of the receivable, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be recovered. We also base our assessment of the collectibility of straight-line rent receivables on several factors, including, among other things, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the historical operations and operating trends of the property, the historical payment pattern of the tenant and the type of property. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to receive the rent payments due in the future, we provide a reserve against the recognized straight-line rent receivable asset for the portion, up to its full value, that we estimate may not be recovered. If we change our assumptions or estimates regarding the collectibility of future rent payments required by a lease, we may adjust our reserve to increase or reduce the rental revenue recognized in the period we make such change in our assumptions or estimates.
Stock-Based Compensation
We recognize share-based payments to employees and directors, including grants of stock options, included in General, administrative and professional fees in our Consolidated Statements of Income generally on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period based on the grant date fair value of the award.
Gain on Sale of Assets
We recognize sales of assets only upon the closing of the transaction with the purchaser. We record payments received from purchasers prior to closing as deposits and classify them as other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize gains (net of any taxes) on assets sold using the full accrual method upon closing if the collectibility of the sales price is reasonably assured, we are not obligated to perform any significant activities after the sale to earn the profit, we have received adequate initial investment from the purchaser, and other profit recognition criteria have been satisfied. We may defer recognition of gains in whole or in part until: (i) the profit is determinable, meaning that the collectibility of the sales price is reasonably assured or the amount that will not be collectible can be estimated; and (ii) the earnings process is virtually complete, meaning that we are not obliged to perform any significant activities after the sale to earn the profit.
Federal Income Tax
We have elected to be treated as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. Accordingly, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on net income that we distribute to our stockholders, provided that we continue to qualify as a REIT. However, with respect to certain of our subsidiaries that have elected to be treated as “taxable REIT subsidiaries,” we record income tax expense or benefit, as those entities are subject to federal income tax similar to regular corporations. Certain foreign subsidiaries are subject to foreign income tax, although they did not elect to be treated as TRSs.
We account for deferred income taxes using the asset and liability method and recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in our financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Any increase or decrease in the deferred tax liability that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about expected future tax consequences of events, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur. Deferred income taxes also reflect the impact of operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. A valuation allowance is provided if we believe it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. Any increase or decrease in the valuation allowance that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about the realizability of the related deferred tax asset, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur.
94
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We recognize interest and penalties, if applicable, related to uncertain tax positions as part of income tax benefit (expense).
Foreign Currency
Certain of our subsidiaries’ functional currencies are the local currencies of their respective foreign jurisdictions. We translate the results of operations of our foreign subsidiaries into U.S. dollars using average rates of exchange in effect during the period, and we translate balance sheet accounts using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. We record resulting currency translation adjustments in accumulated other comprehensive income, a component of stockholders’ equity, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, and we record foreign currency transaction gains and losses in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Segment Reporting
As of
December 31, 2015
, 2014 and 2013, we operated through
three
reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties; senior living operations; and MOB operations. In our triple-net leased properties segment, we invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our MOB operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease, and manage MOBs throughout the United States. See “Note 20—Segment Information.”
Operating Leases
We account for payments made pursuant to operating leases in our Consolidated Statements of Income based on actual rent paid, plus or minus a straight-line rent adjustment for leases that provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent.
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Standards
In April 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-03,
Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs
(“ASU 2015-03”), which requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected. Also in August 2015, the FASB issues ASU 2015-15,
Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated With Line-of-Credit Arrangements
(“ASU 2015-15”) which clarifies the SEC staff’s position not objecting to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing such costs, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. We adopted ASU 2015-03 and 2015-15 during 2015. There were deferred financing costs of
$69.1 million
and
$60.3 million
as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively that are now classified within senior notes payable and other debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-16,
Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments
(“ASU 2015-16”) to simplify the accounting for business combinations, specifically as it relates to measurement-period adjustments. Acquiring entities in a business combination must recognize measurement-period adjustments in the reporting period in which the adjustment amounts are determined. Also, ASU 2015-16 requires entities to present separately on the face of the income statement (or disclose in the notes to the financial statements) the portion of the amount recorded in the current period earnings, by line item, that would have been recorded in previous reporting periods if the adjustment to the provisional amounts had been recognized as of the acquisition date. ASU 2015-16 is effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2016 and is to be applied prospectively to measurement-period adjustments that occur after the effective date. We do not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09,
Revenue From Contracts With Customers
(“ASU 2014-09”), which outlines a comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers. ASU 2014-09 states that “an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.” While ASU 2014-09 specifically references contracts with customers, it may apply to certain other transactions such as the sale of real estate or equipment. In 2015, the FASB provided for a one-year deferral of the effective date for ASU
95
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
2014-09 which is now effective for us beginning January 1, 2018. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance; however, we do not expect its adoption to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements, as a substantial portion of our revenue consists of rental income from leasing arrangements, which are specifically excluded from ASU 2014-09.
In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02,
Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis
(“ASU 2015-02”), which makes certain changes to both the variable interest model and the voting model, including changes to (1) the identification of variable interests (fees paid to a decision maker or service provider), (2) the variable interest entity characteristics for a limited partnership or similar entity and (3) the primary beneficiary determination. ASU 2015-02 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2016. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance; however, we do not expect its adoption to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
Note 3—Concentration of Credit Risk
As of
December 31, 2015
, Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent managed or operated approximately
22.5%
,
11.7%
,
8.5%
,
2.1%
and
5.3%
, respectively, of our real estate investments based on gross book value (excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
). Seniors housing communities constituted approximately
65.2%
of our real estate investments based on gross book value (excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
), while MOBs, skilled nursing facilities, specialty hospitals and general acute care hospitals collectively comprised the remaining
34.8%
Our properties were located in
46
states, the District of Columbia,
seven
Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom as of
December 31, 2015
, with properties in
one
state (
California
) accounting for more than 10% of our total revenues and total net operating income (“NOI,” which is defined as total revenues, excluding interest and other income, less property-level operating expenses and medical office building services costs) (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) for each of the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
.
Triple-Net Leased Properties
For the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, approximately
5.3%
,
6.1%
and
6.2%
, respectively, of our total revenues and
9.3%
,
10.9%
and
11.2%
, respectively, of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were derived from our lease agreements with Brookdale Senior Living. For the same periods, approximately
5.6%
,
5.9%
and
6.2%
, respectively, of our total revenues and
9.8%
,
10.6%
and
11.2%
, respectively, of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were derived from our lease agreements with Kindred. As a result of our 2015 acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. (“AHS”) and simultaneous separation and sale of Ardent, for the year ended
December 31, 2015
, approximately
1.3%
of our total revenues and
2.3%
of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were derived from our lease agreements with Ardent. Each of our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent is a triple-net lease that obligates the tenant to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and to comply with the terms of the mortgage financing documents, if any, affecting the properties. In addition, each of our Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent leases has a corporate guaranty. Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred have multiple leases with us and those leases contain cross-default provisions tied to each other, as well as bundled lease renewals (as described in more detail below).
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
. If either Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be impaired. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred or Ardent to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity, our ability to service our indebtedness and other obligations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT (a “Material Adverse Effect”). We also cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred and Ardent will elect to renew their respective leases with us upon expiration of the leases or that we will be able to reposition any non-renewed properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all.
In December 2014, we entered into favorable agreements with Kindred to transition or sell the operations of
nine
licensed healthcare assets, make modifications to the master leases governing
34
leased assets, and reimburse us for certain deferred capital expenditures at skilled nursing facilities previously transferred to new operators. In January 2015, Kindred paid us
$37
96
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
million
in connection with these agreements, which is being amortized over the remaining lease term for the
34
assets governed by the modified master leases. We own or have the rights to all licenses and CONs at the
nine
properties to be transitioned or sold, and Kindred has extensive and detailed obligations to cooperate and ensure an orderly transition of the properties to another operator. As of
December 31, 2015
,
four
of the
nine
properties have been sold and
three
of the
nine
properties were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off, and
one
property was sold subsequent to
December 31, 2015
.
The following table sets forth the future contracted minimum rentals, excluding contingent rent escalations, but including straight-line rent adjustments where applicable, for all of our triple-net and MOB leases as of
December 31, 2015
(excluding properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
):
Brookdale
Senior
Living
Kindred
Other
Total
(In thousands)
2016
$
160,597
$
186,137
$
889,053
$
1,235,787
2017
160,138
186,390
830,679
1,177,207
2018
159,864
152,613
772,267
1,084,744
2019
149,361
135,803
727,235
1,012,399
2020
33,963
114,895
688,204
837,062
Thereafter
23,500
401,088
4,916,928
5,341,516
Total
$
687,423
$
1,176,926
$
8,824,366
$
10,688,715
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2015
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
268
of our
304
seniors housing communities, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, we rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on our managers to set appropriate resident fees and otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under the agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership or any adverse developments in their businesses and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our
34%
ownership interest in Atria entitles us to certain rights and minority protections, as well as the right to appoint two of five members on the Atria board of directors.
Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred, Atria, Sunrise and Ardent Information
Each of Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred is subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC and is required to file with the SEC annual reports containing audited financial information and quarterly reports containing unaudited financial information. The information related to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from SEC filings made by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, as the case may be, or other publicly available information, or was provided to us by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy. We are providing this data for informational purposes only, and you are encouraged to obtain Brookdale Senior Living’s and Kindred’s publicly available filings, which can be found at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
Atria, Sunrise and Ardent are not currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria, Sunrise and Ardent contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from publicly available information or was provided to us by Atria, Sunrise or Ardent, as the case may be, and we have not verified this
97
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy.
Note 4—Acquisitions of Real Estate Property
The following summarizes our acquisition and development activities during
2015
,
2014
and
2013
. We invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties primarily to achieve an expected yield on our investment, to grow and diversify our portfolio and revenue base, and to reduce our dependence on any single tenant, operator or manager, geographic location, asset type, business model or revenue source.
2015 Acquisitions
HCT Acquisition
In January 2015, we acquired HCT in a stock and cash transaction, which added
152
properties to our portfolio. At the effective time of the merger, each share of HCT common stock outstanding (other than shares held by us, HCT or our respective subsidiaries, which shares were canceled) was converted into the right to receive either
0.1688
shares of our common stock (with cash paid in lieu of fractional shares) or
$11.33
per share in cash, at the election of each HCT shareholder. Shares of HCT common stock for which a valid election was not made were converted into the stock consideration. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately
28.4 million
shares of our common stock and
1.1 million
limited partnership units that are redeemable for shares of our common stock and the payment of approximately
$11 million
in cash (excluding cash in lieu of fractional shares). In addition, we assumed
$167 million
of mortgage debt and repaid approximately
$730 million
of debt, net of HCT cash on hand. In August 2015,
20
of the properties that we acquired in the HCT acquisition were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
Ardent Health Services Acquisition
On August 4, 2015, we completed our acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. and simultaneous separation and sale of the Ardent hospital operating company to a consortium composed of an entity controlled by Equity Group Investments, Ardent’s management team and us (collectively the “Ardent Transaction”). As of the acquisition date, we recorded the estimated fair value of our investment in owned hospital and other real estate of approximately
$1.3 billion
. At closing, we paid
$26.3 million
for our
9.9%
interest in Ardent which represents our estimate of the acquisition date fair value of this interest. Upon closing, we entered into a long-term triple-net master lease with Ardent to operate the
ten
hospital campuses and other real estate we acquired.
Other 2015 Acquisitions
In 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately
$612 million
, including the acquisition of
eleven
triple-net
leased properties;
eleven
MOBs (including
eight
MOBs that we had previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities; see “Note 7—Investments in Unconsolidated Entities.”) and
12
skilled nursing facilities (all of which were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off).
Completed Developments
During 2015, we completed the development of
one
triple-net leased seniors housing community, representing
$9.3 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015.
98
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estimated Fair Value
We are accounting for our 2015 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC Topic 805,
Business Combinations
(“ASC 805”). Our initial accounting for the acquisitions completed during 2015 remains subject to further adjustment. The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations
MOB Operations
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
190,566
$
70,713
$
173,307
$
434,586
Buildings and improvements
1,724,812
703,080
1,214,403
3,642,295
Acquired lease intangibles
169,362
83,867
184,540
437,769
Other assets
173,232
272,888
403,046
849,166
Total assets acquired
2,257,972
1,130,548
1,975,296
5,363,816
Notes payable and other debt
—
77,940
99,917
177,857
Other liabilities
43,811
45,408
46,734
135,953
Total liabilities assumed
43,811
123,348
146,651
313,810
Net assets acquired
2,214,161
1,007,200
1,828,645
4,961,921
Redeemable OP unitholder interests assumed
88,085
Cash acquired
59,584
Equity issued
2,216,355
Total cash used
$
2,685,982
For certain acquisitions, the determination of fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed has changed and is subject to further adjustment. We made certain adjustments during 2015, including the fourth quarter, due primarily to reclassification adjustments for presentation and adjustments to our valuation assumptions. The changes to our valuation assumptions were based on more accurate information concerning the subject assets and liabilities. None of these changes had a material impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Included in other assets above is
$746.9 million
of goodwill, which represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date. A substantial amount of this goodwill was due to an increase in our stock price between the announcement date and closing dates of the HCT acquisition. Goodwill has been allocated to our reportable business segments based on the respective fair value of the net assets acquired, as follows: triple-net leased properties -
$133.6 million
; senior living operations -
$219.1 million
; and MOB operations -
$394.2 million
.
Aggregate Revenue and NOI
For the year ended December 31, 2015, aggregate revenue and NOI derived from our 2015 real estate acquisitions during our period of ownership were
$327.0 million
and
$201.9 million
, respectively, excluding revenue and NOI for any assets contributed in the CCP Spin-Off.
Transaction Costs
Transaction costs are expensed as incurred and included in merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income. For the years ending December 31, 2015 and 2014, we expensed as incurred,
$99.0 million
and
$10.8 million
, respectively, costs related to our completed 2015 transactions,
$4.1 million
and
$1.4 million
of which are reported within discontinued operations. These transaction costs exclude any separation costs associated with the CCP Spin-Off (refer to “Note 5 - Dispositions”).
99
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Unaudited Pro Forma
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if we had consummated the HCT acquisition and Ardent Transaction as of January 1, 2014 and excludes assets that were acquired in the HCT acquisition but subsequently disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
For the Years Ended December 31,
2015
2014
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues
$
3,361,658
$
3,164,100
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
475,017
$
465,671
Earnings per common share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.44
$
1.44
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.42
$
1.43
Weighted average shares used in computing earnings per common share:
Basic
330,311
322,590
Diluted
334,007
326,210
Acquisition-related costs related to the HCT acquisition and the Ardent Transaction are not expected to have a continuing impact and therefore have been excluded from these pro forma results. The pro forma results also do not include the impact of any synergies that may be achieved in the HCT acquisition and the Ardent Transaction, any lower costs of borrowing resulting from the acquisition or any strategies that management may consider in order to continue to efficiently manage our operations, nor do they give pro forma effect to any other acquisitions, dispositions or capital markets transactions that we completed during the periods presented. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of the operating results that would have been obtained had the HCT acquisition and Ardent Transaction occurred at the beginning of the periods presented, nor are they necessarily indicative of future operating results.
2014 Acquisitions
Holiday Canada Acquisition
In August 2014, we acquired
29
seniors housing communities located in Canada from Holiday Retirement (the “Holiday Canada Acquisition”) for a purchase price of CAD
957.0 million
. We also paid CAD
26.9 million
in costs relating to the early repayment of debt at closing. We funded the Holiday Canada Acquisition initially through borrowings under a CAD
791.0 million
unsecured term loan that we incurred in July 2014 (and subsequently repaid primarily through a private placement of senior notes in Canada) and the assumption of CAD
193.7 million
of debt.
Other 2014 Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2014, we also acquired
three
triple-net leased private hospitals (located in the United Kingdom),
26
triple-net leased seniors housing communities and
four
seniors housing communities that are being operated by independent third-party managers for aggregate consideration of approximately
$812.0 million
. We also paid
$18.8 million
in costs relating to the early repayment of debt at closing of the applicable transactions. In addition, we acquired a construction design, planning and consulting business to complement our MOB operations through the issuance of
148,241
shares of our common stock.
Completed Developments
During 2014, we completed the development of
two
MOBs and
one
seniors housing community, representing
$41.2 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2014.
100
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estimated Fair Value
We are accounting for our 2014 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC Topic 805,
Business Combinations
(“ASC 805”). The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in our 2014 real estate acquisitions, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
45,586
$
100,281
$
145,867
Buildings and improvements
546,849
1,081,630
1,628,479
Acquired lease intangibles
28,883
36,452
65,335
Other assets
227
12,394
12,621
Total assets acquired
621,545
1,230,757
1,852,302
Notes payable and other debt
12,927
228,150
241,077
Other liabilities
8,609
124,468
133,077
Total liabilities assumed
21,536
352,618
374,154
Net assets acquired
600,009
878,139
1,478,148
Cash acquired
227
8,704
8,931
Total cash used
$
599,782
$
869,435
$
1,469,217
Aggregate Revenue and NOI
For the year ended December 31, 2014, aggregate revenues and NOI derived from our 2014 real estate acquisitions (for our period of ownership) were
$75.9 million
and
$41.5 million
, respectively.
Transaction Costs
As of December 31, 2014, we had incurred a total of
$26.2 million
of acquisition-related costs related to our completed 2014 acquisitions, all of which were expensed as incurred and included in merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income for the applicable periods. For the year ended December 31, 2014, we expensed
$23.8 million
of these acquisition-related costs related to our completed 2014 acquisitions.
2013 Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2013, we acquired
27
triple-net leased seniors housing communities,
24
seniors housing communities that are being operated by independent third-party managers (
eight
of which we previously leased pursuant to a capital lease) and
11
MOBs for aggregate consideration of approximately
$1.8 billion
.
Completed Developments
During the year ended December 31, 2013, we completed the development of
two
seniors housing communities,
one
MOB, and
one
hospital, representing
$65.5 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2013.
101
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estimated Fair Value
We accounted for our 2013 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC 805. We accounted for the acquisition of the
eight
seniors housing communities that we previously leased pursuant to a capital lease in accordance with ASC Topic 840,
Leases
. The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in our 2013 real estate acquisitions, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations (1)
MOB Operations
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
51,419
$
45,566
$
3,923
$
100,908
Buildings and improvements
803,227
579,577
138,792
1,521,596
Acquired lease intangibles
8,945
16,920
10,362
36,227
Other assets
3,285
2,607
2,453
8,345
Total assets acquired
866,876
644,670
155,530
1,667,076
Notes payable and other debt
36,300
5,136
—
41,436
Other liabilities
11,423
12,285
6,510
30,218
Total liabilities assumed
47,723
17,421
6,510
71,654
Noncontrolling interest assumed
10,113
—
1,672
11,785
Net assets acquired
809,040
627,249
147,348
1,583,637
Cash acquired
753
—
1,397
2,150
Total cash used
$
808,287
$
627,249
$
145,951
$
1,581,487
________________
(1) Includes settlement of a
$142.2 million
capital lease obligation related to
eight
seniors housing communities.
Note 5—Dispositions
CCP Spin-Off
On August 17, 2015, we completed the CCP Spin-Off. In connection with the CCP Spin-Off, we disposed of
355
high-quality triple-net leased skilled nursing facilities and other healthcare assets operated by private regional and local care providers. The CCP Spin-Off was effectuated through a distribution of the common shares of CCP to holders of our common stock as of the distribution record date, and qualified as a tax-free distribution to our stockholders. For every four shares of Ventas common stock held as of the distribution record date of August 10, 2015, Ventas stockholders received one CCP common share on August 17, 2015. On August 17, 2015, just prior to the effective time of the spin-off, CCP (as our then wholly owned subsidiary) received approximately
$1.4 billion
of proceeds from a recently completed term loan and revolving credit facility. CCP paid us a distribution of
$1.3 billion
from these proceeds. We used this distribution from CCP to pay down our existing debt (
$1.1 billion
) and to pay for a portion of our quarterly installment of dividends to our stockholders (
$0.2 billion
).
The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities have been presented as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income. Discontinued operations also include separation costs incurred to complete the CCP Spin-Off of
$42.3 million
and
$0.2 million
for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Separation costs for 2015 include
$3.5 million
of stock-based compensation expense representing the incremental fair value of previously vested stock-based compensation awards as of the spin date. In addition, the assets and liabilities of CCP are presented separately from assets and liabilities from continuing operations in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The accompanying consolidated statements of cash flows include within operating, investing and financing cash flows those activities which related to our period of ownership of the CCP properties.
102
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following is a summary of the assets and liabilities of CCP at the CCP Spin-Off date (dollars in thousands):
August 17, 2015
December 31, 2014
(In thousands)
Assets:
Net real estate investments
$
2,588,255
$
2,274,310
Cash and cash equivalents
1,749
2,710
Goodwill
135,446
88,959
Assets held for sale
7,610
8,435
Other assets
15,089
16,596
Total assets
2,748,149
2,391,010
Liabilities:
Accounts payable and other liabilities
217,760
204,359
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
985
1,288
Total liabilities
218,745
205,647
Net assets:
$
2,529,404
$
2,185,363
Summarized financial information for CCP discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 respectively is as follows (dollars in thousands):
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
196,848
$
295,767
$
291,524
Income from loans and investments
2,148
3,392
3,783
Interest and other income
63
2
25
199,059
299,161
295,332
Expenses:
Interest
61,613
87,648
89,602
Depreciation and amortization
79,479
101,760
94,606
General, administrative and professional fees
9
9
25
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
46,402
1,746
—
Other
1,332
13,184
1,368
188,835
204,347
185,601
Income before real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
10,224
94,814
109,731
Gain (loss) on real estate dispositions
—
—
—
Net income from discontinued operations
10,224
94,814
109,731
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
120
185
220
Net income from discontinued operations attributable to common stockholders
$
10,104
$
94,629
$
109,511
Capital and development project expenditures relating to CCP for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 were
$21.8 million
,
$17.2 million
and
10.2 million
, respectively. Other than capital and development project expenditures there were no other significant non-cash operating or investing activities relating CCP.
We and CCP entered into a transition services agreement prior to the CCP Spin-Off pursuant to which we and our subsidiaries provide to CCP, on an interim, transitional basis, various services. The services provided include information
103
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
technology, accounting and tax services. The overall fee charged by us for such services (the "Service Fee") is
$2.5 million
for one year. Through December 31, 2015, we recognized income of
$0.9 million
, relating to the Service Fee, which is payable in four quarterly installments. The transition services agreement will terminate on the expiration of the term of the last service provided under the agreement, which will be on or prior to August 31, 2016.
Discontinued Operations - Other than CCP Spin-Off
In addition to the amounts reported within discontinued operations relating to the CCP Spin-Off, we reported net income from discontinued operations attributable to common stockholders of
$1.0 million
,
$5.1 million
, and
$30.3 million
for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
As of December 31, 2015, all properties whose results are presented within discontinued operations have been sold.
2015 Activity
During 2015, we sold
39
triple-net leased properties and
26
MOBs for aggregate consideration of
$541.0 million
, including lease termination fees of
$6.0 million
(included within triple-net leased rental income in our Consolidated Statements of Income). We recognized a gain on the sales of these assets of
$46.3 million
(net of taxes), of which
$27.4 million
is being deferred due to
one
secured loan (
$78.4 million
) and
one
non-mortgage loan (
$20.0 million
) we made to the buyers in connection with the sales of certain assets. These deferred gains will be recognized into income as principal payments are made on the loans over their respective terms.
Subsequent to December 31, 2015 we sold
one
triple-net leased property,
one
seniors housing community included in our seniors housing operations reportable business segment and
one
MOB for aggregate consideration of
$54.5 million
and we estimate recognizing gains on the sales of these assets of
$26.9 million
.
2014 Activity
During 2014, we sold
16
triple-net leased properties,
two
seniors housing communities included in our seniors housing operations reportable business segment and
four
properties included in our MOB operations reportable business segment for aggregate consideration of
$118.2 million
. We recognized a net gain on the sales of these assets of
$21.3 million
,
$1.5 million
of which is reported within discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
2013 Activity
During 2013, we sold
19
triple-net leased properties,
one
seniors housing community included in our senior living operations reportable business segment and
two
properties included in our MOB operations reportable business segment for aggregate consideration of
$35.1 million
, including lease termination fees of
$0.3 million
. We recognized a net gain on the sales of these assets of
$5.0 million
, all of which is reported within discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Assets Held for Sale
The table below summarizes our real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
and 2014, including the amounts reported within other assets and accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
December 31, 2015
December 31, 2014
Number of Properties Held for Sale
Assets Held for Sale
Liabilities Held for Sale
Number of Properties Held for Sale (2)
Assets Held for Sale
Liabilities Held for Sale
(Dollars in thousands)
Triple-net leased properties
2
$
4,488
$
44
333
$
2,410,840
$
205,931
MOB operations (1)
8
68,619
24,759
32
144,482
32,042
Seniors living operations
1
19,953
9,537
—
—
—
Total
11
$
93,060
$
34,340
365
$
2,555,322
$
237,973
(1)
Four
MOBs previously reported as held for sale (and discontinued operations) were classified as held and used (and part of continuing operations) as of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.
(2)
December 31, 2014 includes
323
properties disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off. Also included are loans, goodwill and other assets and liabilities contributed to CCP.
104
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Real Estate Impairment
We recognized impairments of
$42.2 million
,
$56.6 million
and
$51.5 million
for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 respectively, which are recorded primarily as a component of depreciation and amortization and relate primarily to our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment. Of these impairments,
$8.9 million
,
$13.2 million
and
$41.6 million
for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 respectively were reported in discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Our recorded impairments were primarily the result of a change in our intent to hold the impaired assets. In each case, we recognized an impairment in the periods in which our change in intent was made.
Note 6—Loans Receivable and Investments
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, we had
$895.0 million
and
$896.5 million
, respectively, of net loans receivable and investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties. The following is a summary of our net loans receivable and investments as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, including amortized cost, fair value and unrealized gains on available-for-sale investments:
December 31, 2015
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain (Loss)
(In thousands)
Secured mortgage loans and other
$
793,433
$
793,433
$
816,849
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments (1)
63,679
62,130
63,679
1,549
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
857,112
855,563
880,528
1,549
Non-mortgage loans receivable
37,926
37,926
38,806
—
Total investments reported as Other assets
37,926
37,926
38,806
—
Total net loans receivable and investments
$
895,038
$
893,489
$
919,334
$
1,549
(1) Investments in government-sponsored pooled loans have contractual maturity dates in 2022 and 2023.
December 31, 2014
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain (Loss)
(In thousands)
Secured mortgage loans and other
$
739,766
$
739,766
$
748,842
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
63,115
61,377
63,115
1,738
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
802,881
801,143
811,957
1,738
Non-mortgage loans receivable
17,620
17,620
19,058
—
Marketable securities
76,046
71,000
76,046
5,046
Total investments reported as Other assets
93,666
88,620
95,104
5,046
Total net loans receivable and investments
$
896,547
$
889,763
$
907,061
$
6,784
2015 Activity
As discussed in Note 5 - Dispositions, we issued
one
secured loan (
$78.4 million
) and
one
non-mortgage loan (
$20.0 million
) to buyers in connection with the sales of certain assets. In June 2015 we sold our
$71.0 million
investment in senior unsecured corporate bonds for
$76.8 million
. We recognized a gain of
$5.8 million
that is included within income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended
December 31, 2015
. This gain includes
$5.0 million
that was previously unrealized within accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2014.
105
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
During the year ended
December 31, 2015
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$97.0 million
in final repayment of
three
secured and
one
non-mortgage loans receivable. We recognized gains aggregating
$1.9 million
on the repayment of these loans receivable that are recorded in income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended
December 31, 2015
.
We disposed of
two
secured and
seven
non-mortgage loans receivable as part of the CCP Spin-Off having carrying amounts of
$26.9 million
and
$4.2 million
, respectively, as of the CCP Spin-Off date and carrying amounts of
$26.9 million
and $
4.3 million
, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. These loans are reported as assets held for sale on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2014.
2014 Activity
During the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we made a
$425.0
million secured mezzanine loan investment that has a blended annual interest rate of
8.1%
and has contractual maturities ranging between 2016 and 2019, and we purchased
$71.0 million
principal amount of senior unsecured corporate bonds, a
$38.7 million
interest in a government-sponsored pooled loan investment, and
$21.7 million
of marketable equity securities. During the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we sold all of our marketable equity securities for
$22.3 million
and recognized a gain of
$0.6 million
.
During the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$55.9 million
in final repayment of
three
secured and
two
non-mortgage loans receivable. We recognized aggregate gains of
$5.2 million
on the repayment of these loans receivable that are recorded in income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended
December 31, 2014
.
Note 7—Investments in Unconsolidated Entities
We report investments in unconsolidated entities over whose operating and financial policies we have the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method of accounting. We are not required to consolidate these entities because our joint venture partners have significant participating rights, nor are these entities considered VIEs, as they are controlled by equity holders with sufficient capital. At
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, we had ownership interests (ranging from
5%
to
25%
) in joint ventures that owned
41
properties and
51
properties, respectively. We account for our interests in real estate joint ventures, as well as our
34%
interest in Atria and
9.9%
interest in Ardent (which are included within other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets), under the equity method of accounting.
With the exception of our interests in Atria and Ardent, we provide various services to each unconsolidated entity in exchange for fees and reimbursements. Total management fees earned in connection with these entities were
$7.8 million
,
$8.4 million
and
$7.0 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, respectively (which is included in medical office building and other services revenue in our Consolidated Statements of Income).
In October 2015, we acquired the
95%
controlling interests in
ten
MOBs from a joint venture entity in which we have a
5%
interest and that we account for as an equity method investment. In connection with this acquisition, we re-measured our previously held equity interest (associated with the acquired MOBs) and recognized a loss of
$0.2 million
, which is included in income from unconsolidated entities in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Since the acquisition, operations relating to these properties have been consolidated in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
In March 2013, we acquired
two
MOBs from a joint venture entity in which we have a
5%
interest and that we account for as an equity method investment. In connection with this acquisition, we re-measured our previously held equity interest (associated with the acquired MOBs) and recognized a gain of
$1.3 million
, which is included in income from unconsolidated entities in our Consolidated Statements of Income. Since the acquisition, operations relating to these properties have been consolidated in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
106
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 8—Intangibles
The following is a summary of our intangibles as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
December 31, 2015
December 31, 2014
Balance
Remaining
Weighted Average
Amortization
Period in Years
Balance
Remaining
Weighted Average
Amortization
Period in Years
(Dollars in thousands)
Intangible assets:
Above market lease intangibles
$
155,161
7.0
$
150,775
6.8
In-place and other lease intangibles
1,189,261
20.9
804,260
24.5
Goodwill
1,047,497
N/A
363,971
N/A
Other intangibles
35,736
8.6
36,030
7.9
Accumulated amortization
(655,176
)
N/A
(515,603
)
N/A
Net intangible assets
$
1,772,479
19.2
$
839,433
21.0
Intangible liabilities:
Below market lease intangibles
$
256,034
14.2
$
229,495
14.1
Other lease intangibles
35,925
30.1
32,103
26.1
Accumulated amortization
(113,647
)
N/A
(97,371
)
N/A
Purchase option intangibles
3,568
N/A
13,549
N/A
Net intangible liabilities
$
181,880
15.6
$
177,776
15.1
________
N/A—Not Applicable
Above market lease intangibles and in-place and other lease intangibles are included in acquired lease intangibles within real estate investments on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Other intangibles (including non-compete agreements, trade names and trademarks) are included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Below market lease intangibles, other lease intangibles and purchase option intangibles are included in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. For the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, our net amortization expense related to these intangibles was
$142.7 million
,
$74.6 million
and
$77.0 million
, respectively. The estimated net amortization expense related to these intangibles for each of the next five years is as follows:
2016
—
$98.7 million
;
2017
—
$52.0 million
;
2018
—
$42.9 million
;
2019
—
$36.6 million
; and
2020
—
$33.9 million
.
The change in the carrying amount of goodwill, by segment, for 2015 was as follows (in thousands):
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations
MOB Operations
Total
Goodwill as of December 31, 2014 (excluding held for sale)
$
327,232
$
41,741
$
83,958
$
452,931
Acquisitions
133,539
219,141
394,203
746,883
Partial disposal of reporting unit
(11,967
)
—
(3,861
)
(15,828
)
Goodwill allocated in the CCP Spin-Off
(135,446
)
—
—
(135,446
)
Currency translation adjustments and other
(1,043
)
—
—
(1,043
)
Goodwill as of December 31, 2015
$
312,315
$
260,882
$
474,300
$
1,047,497
107
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 9—Other Assets
The following is a summary of our other assets as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Straight-line rent receivables, net
$
219,064
$
187,572
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
37,926
17,620
Other intangibles, net
13,224
19,122
Marketable securities
—
76,046
Other
142,189
151,398
Total other assets
$
412,403
$
451,758
108
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 10—Borrowing Arrangements
The following is a summary of our senior notes payable and other debt as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Unsecured revolving credit facility (1)
$
180,683
$
919,099
3.125% Senior Notes due 2015
—
400,000
6% Senior Notes due 2015
—
234,420
1.55% Senior Notes due 2016
550,000
550,000
1.250% Senior Notes due 2017
300,000
300,000
2.00% Senior Notes due 2018
700,000
700,000
Unsecured term loan due 2018 (2)
200,000
200,000
Unsecured term loan due 2019 (2)
468,477
790,634
4.00% Senior Notes due 2019
600,000
600,000
3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019 (3)
289,038
344,204
2.700% Senior Notes due 2020
500,000
500,000
Unsecured term loan due 2020
900,000
—
4.750% Senior Notes due 2021
700,000
700,000
4.25% Senior Notes due 2022
600,000
600,000
3.25% Senior Notes due 2022
500,000
500,000
3.300% Senior Notes due 2022 (3)
180,649
—
3.750% Senior Notes due 2024
400,000
400,000
4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024 (3)
180,649
215,128
3.500% Senior Notes due 2025
600,000
—
4.125% Senior Notes due 2026
500,000
—
6.90% Senior Notes due 2037
52,400
52,400
6.59% Senior Notes due 2038
22,973
22,973
5.45% Senior Notes due 2043
258,750
258,750
5.70% Senior Notes due 2043
300,000
300,000
4.375% Senior Notes due 2045
300,000
—
Mortgage loans and other (4)
1,987,401
2,300,687
Total
11,271,020
10,888,295
Deferred financing costs, net
(69,121
)
(60,328
)
Unamortized fair value adjustment
33,570
42,516
Unamortized discounts
(28,473
)
(26,132
)
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
11,206,996
$
10,844,351
_______
(1)
$9.7 million
and
$164.1 million
of aggregate borrowings are denominated in Canadian dollars as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively.
(2)
These amounts represent in aggregate the
$668 million
of unsecured term loan borrowings under our unsecured credit facility, of which
$89.9 million
included in the 2019 tranche is in the form of Canadian dollars.
(3)
These borrowings are in the form of Canadian dollars.
(4)
2015
and
2014
exclude
$22.9 million
and
$27.6 million
, respectively, of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale that is included in liabilities related to assets held for sale on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
109
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Unsecured Revolving Credit Facility and Unsecured Term Loans
Our unsecured credit facility is comprised of a
$2.0 billion
revolving credit facility priced at
LIBOR
plus
1.0%
as of
December 31, 2015
, and a
$200.0 million
four
-year term loan and an
$800.0 million
five
-year term loan, each priced at
LIBOR
plus
1.05%
as of
December 31, 2015
. The revolving credit facility matures in January 2018, but may be extended, at our option subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, for an additional period of
one
year. The
$200.0 million
and
$800.0 million
term loans mature in January 2018 and January 2019, respectively. The unsecured credit facility also includes an accordion feature that permits us to increase our aggregate borrowing capacity thereunder to up to
$3.5 billion
.
Our unsecured credit facility imposes certain customary restrictions on us, including restrictions pertaining to: (i) liens; (ii) investments; (iii) the incurrence of additional indebtedness; (iv) mergers and dissolutions; (v) certain dividend, distribution and other payments; (vi) permitted businesses; (vii) transactions with affiliates; (viii) agreements limiting certain liens; and (ix) the maintenance of certain consolidated total leverage, secured debt leverage, unsecured debt leverage and fixed charge coverage ratios and minimum consolidated adjusted net worth, and contains customary events of default.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$180.7 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$14.9 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$1.8 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
In August 2015, we completed a
$900 million
five
year term loan having a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus
97.5
basis points. The term loan matures in 2020.
Also in August 2015, we repaid
$305.0 million
of our unsecured term loan due 2019 and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.6 million
representing a write-off of the then unamortized deferred financing fees.
In July 2014, we entered into a new CAD
791.0 million
unsecured term loan to initially fund the Holiday Canada Acquisition. The term loan was scheduled to mature on July 30, 2015, but in September 2014, we repaid CAD
660.0 million
of the unsecured term loan principally with proceeds from the sale of unsecured senior notes issued by our wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, and in December 2014, we repaid in full the remaining borrowings outstanding under the term loan.
We recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$1.5 million
for the year ended December 31, 2013 representing the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees as a result of the replacement of our previous unsecured revolving credit facility.
Senior Notes
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had outstanding
$6.8 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership (“Ventas Realty”) (
$3.9 billion
of which was co-issued by Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation), approximately
$75.4 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. (“NHP”) and assumed by our subsidiary, Nationwide Health Properties, LLC (“NHP LLC”), as successor to NHP, in connection with our acquisition of NHP, and CAD
900.0 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited. All of the senior notes issued by Ventas Realty and Ventas Canada Finance Limited are unconditionally guaranteed by Ventas, Inc.
In September 2015, we redeemed all
$400.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our
3.125%
senior notes due November 2015 at a redemption price equal to
100.7%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.9 million
.
In July 2015, we issued and sold
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.218%
of par, for total proceeds of
$496.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In May 2015, we repaid in full, at par,
$234.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
6%
senior notes due 2015 upon maturity.
In January 2015, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.500%
senior notes due 2025 at a public offering price equal to
99.663%
of par, for total proceeds of
$598.0 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.375%
senior notes due 2045 at a public offering price equal to
99.500%
of par, for total proceeds of
$298.5 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
Also in January 2015, Ventas Canada Finance Limited issued and sold CAD
250.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.30%
senior notes, series C due 2022 at an offering price equal to
99.992%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
250.0 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada.
110
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In September 2014, Ventas Canada Finance Limited issued and sold CAD
400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.00%
senior notes, series A due 2019 at an offering price equal to
99.713%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
398.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses, and CAD
250.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.125%
senior notes, series B due 2024 at an offering price equal to
99.601%
of par, for total proceeds of CAD
249.0 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada.
In April 2014, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 at a public offering price equal to
99.815%
of par, for total proceeds of
$299.4 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.750%
senior notes due 2024 at a public offering price equal to
99.304%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.2
million before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In September 2013, Ventas Realty issued and sold:
$550.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
1.55%
senior notes due 2016 at a public offering price equal to
99.910%
of par, for total proceeds of
$549.5 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses; and
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
5.70%
senior notes due 2043 at a public offering price equal to
99.628%
of par, for total proceeds of
$298.9 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In March 2013, Ventas Realty issued and sold:
$258.8 million
aggregate principal amount of
5.45%
senior notes due 2043 at a public offering price equal to par, for total proceeds of
$258.8 million
before the underwriting discounts and expenses; and
$500.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.700%
senior notes due 2020 at a public offering price equal to
99.942%
of par, for total proceeds of
$499.7 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In February 2013, we repaid in full, at par,
$270.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our
6.25%
senior notes due 2013 upon maturity.
Ventas Realty’s senior notes are part of our and Ventas Realty’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of our and Ventas Realty’s existing and future senior obligations and ranking senior in right of payment to all of our and Ventas Realty’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, Ventas Realty’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to our and Ventas Realty’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. Ventas Realty’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of our subsidiaries (other than Ventas Realty and, with respect to those senior notes co-issued by Ventas Capital Corporation, Ventas Capital Corporation).
Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are part of our and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to our and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of our subsidiaries (other than Ventas Canada Finance Limited).
NHP LLC’s senior notes are part of NHP LLC’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of NHP LLC’s existing and future senior obligations and ranking senior to all of NHP LLC’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, NHP LLC’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to NHP LLC’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. NHP LLC’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of its subsidiaries.
Ventas Realty, Ventas Canada Finance Limited and NHP LLC may redeem each series of their respective senior notes (other than NHP LLC’s
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 and
6.59%
senior notes due 2038), in whole at any time or in part from time to time, prior to maturity at the redemption prices set forth in the applicable indenture (which include, in many instances, a make-whole premium), plus, in each case, accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the redemption date.
NHP LLC’s
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 are subject to repurchase at the option of the holders, at par, on October 1 in each of 2017 and 2027, and its
6.59%
senior notes due 2038 are subject to repurchase at the option of the holders, at par, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
Mortgages
At
December 31, 2015
, we had
133
mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$2.0 billion
and secured by
157
of our properties. Of these loans,
116
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$1.6 billion
bear interest at fixed rates ranging from
3.6%
to
8.6%
per annum, and
17
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$433.3 million
bear interest at variable rates ranging from
0.9%
to
3.2%
per annum as of
December 31, 2015
. At
December 31, 2015
, the weighted average annual rate on our fixed rate mortgage loans was
5.7%
, and the weighted average annual rate on our variable rate mortgage loans was
2.0%
. Our mortgage loans had a weighted average maturity of
5.5
years as of
December 31, 2015
.
111
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
During 2015, we repaid in full mortgage loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$461.9 million
and a weighted average maturity of
2.1 years
and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$9.9 million
in connection with these repayments.
During 2014, we assumed or incurred mortgage debt of
$246.8 million
and repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$398.0 million
, and recognized a net loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.3 million
in connection with these repayments.
During 2013, we assumed or incurred mortgage debt of
$178.8 million
and repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$493.7 million
, and recognized a net gain on extinguishment of debt of
$0.5 million
in connection with these repayments.
Scheduled Maturities of Borrowing Arrangements and Other Provisions
As of
December 31, 2015
, our indebtedness had the following maturities:
Principal Amount
Due at Maturity
Unsecured Revolving
Credit
Facility(1)
Scheduled Periodic
Amortization
Total Maturities
(In thousands)
2016 (2)
$
602,661
$
—
$
31,124
$
633,785
2017 (2)
746,458
—
28,500
774,958
2018
1,101,879
180,683
23,486
1,306,048
2019
1,900,986
—
15,929
1,916,915
2020
1,416,913
—
11,122
1,428,035
Thereafter (3)
5,085,663
—
125,616
5,211,279
Total maturities
$
10,854,560
$
180,683
$
235,777
$
11,271,020
(1)
At
December 31, 2015
, we had
$53.0 million
of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, for
$127.7 million
of net borrowings outstanding under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
(2)
Excludes
$22.9 million
of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2015
that is scheduled to mature in 2016 and 2017.
(3)
Includes
$52.4 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 that is subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on October 1 in each of 2017 and 2027, and
$23.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.59%
senior notes due 2038 that is subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
The instruments governing our outstanding indebtedness contain covenants that limit our ability and the ability of certain of our subsidiaries to, among other things: (i) incur debt; (ii) make certain dividends, distributions and investments; (iii) enter into certain transactions; and/or (iv) merge, consolidate or sell certain assets. Ventas Realty’s and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes also require us and our subsidiaries to maintain total unencumbered assets of at least
150%
of our unsecured debt. Our unsecured credit facility also requires us to maintain certain financial covenants pertaining to, among other things, our consolidated total leverage, secured debt, unsecured debt, fixed charge coverage and net worth.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we were in compliance with all of these covenants.
Derivatives and Hedging
In the normal course of our business, interest rate fluctuations affect future cash flows under our variable rate debt obligations, loans receivable and marketable debt securities and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations affect our operating results. We follow established risk management policies and procedures, including the use of derivative instruments, to mitigate the impact of these risks.
For interest rate exposures, we use derivatives primarily to fix the rate on our variable rate debt and to manage our borrowing costs. We do not use derivative instruments for trading or speculative purposes, and we have a policy of entering into contracts only with major financial institutions based upon their credit ratings and other factors. When considered together with the underlying exposure that the derivative is designed to hedge, we do not expect that the use of derivatives in this manner would have any material adverse effect on our future financial condition or results of operations.
112
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of
December 31, 2015
, our variable rate debt obligations of
$2.2 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$150.5 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with a maturity of March 21, 2018 that effectively convert fixed rate debt to variable rate debt. As of
December 31, 2015
, our fixed rate debt obligations of
$9.1 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$48.1 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from October 1, 2016 to April 1, 2019, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt.
In February 2016, we entered into a
$200 million
notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at
1.132%
through the maturity date of the swap. The maturity date of the Ardent Term Loan is also August 3, 2020.
Unamortized Fair Value Adjustment
As of
December 31, 2015
, the unamortized fair value adjustment related to the long-term debt we assumed in connection with various acquisitions was
$33.6 million
and will be recognized as effective yield adjustments over the remaining terms of the instruments. The estimated aggregate amortization of the fair value adjustment related to long-term debt (which is reflected as a reduction of interest expense) was
$16.2 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2015
and for each of the next five years will be as follows:
2016
—
$11.2 million
;
2017
—
$6.6 million
;
2018
—
$2.7 million
;
2019
—
$2.0 million
; and
2020
—
$1.5 million
.
Note 11—Fair Values of Financial Instruments
As of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, the carrying amounts and fair values of our financial instruments were as follows:
2015
2014
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
(In thousands)
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
$
53,023
$
53,023
$
55,348
$
55,348
Secured loans receivable, net
793,433
816,849
739,766
748,842
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
37,926
38,806
17,620
19,058
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
63,679
63,679
63,115
63,115
Marketable securities
—
—
76,046
76,046
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt, gross
11,271,020
11,384,880
10,888,295
11,197,131
Derivative instruments and other liabilities
2,696
2,696
2,743
2,743
Redeemable OP unitholder interests
188,546
188,546
159,134
159,134
Fair value estimates are subjective in nature and based upon several important assumptions, including estimates of future cash flows, risks, discount rates and relevant comparable market information associated with each financial instrument. The use of different market assumptions and estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the reported estimated fair value amounts. Accordingly, the estimates presented above are not necessarily indicative of the amounts we would realize in a current market exchange.
Note 12—Stock-Based Compensation
Compensation Plans
We currently have:
five
plans under which outstanding options to purchase common stock, shares of restricted stock or restricted stock units have been, or may in the future be, granted to our officers, employees and non-employee directors (the 2000 Incentive Compensation Plan (Employee Plan), the 2004 Stock Plan for Directors, the 2006 Incentive Plan, the 2006 Stock Plan for Directors, and the 2012 Incentive Plan);
one
plan under which executive officers may receive common stock in lieu of compensation (the Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan); and
one
plan under which certain non-employee directors have received or may receive common stock in lieu of director fees (the Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan). These plans are referred to collectively as the “Plans.”
During the year ended
December 31, 2015
, we were permitted to issue shares and grant options, restricted stock and restricted stock units only under the Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, the Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock
113
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Compensation Plan and the 2012 Incentive Plan. The 2006 Incentive Plan and the 2006 Stock Plan for Directors (collectively, the “2006 Plans”) expired on December 31, 2012, and no additional grants were permitted under those Plans after that date.
The number of shares initially reserved for issuance and the number of shares available for future grants or issuance under these Plans as of
December 31, 2015
were as follows:
•
Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
594,070
shares were reserved initially for issuance to our executive officers in lieu of the payment of all or a portion of their salary, at their option, and
594,070
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2015
.
•
Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
594,070
shares were reserved initially for issuance to nonemployee directors in lieu of the payment of all or a portion of their retainer and meeting fees, at their option, and
478,048
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2015
.
•
2012 Incentive Plan—
10,499,135
shares (plus the number of shares or options outstanding under the 2006 Plans as of December 31, 2012 that were or are subsequently forfeited or expire unexercised) were reserved initially for grants or issuance to employees and non-employee directors, and
7,876,301
shares (plus the number of shares or options outstanding under the 2006 Plans as of
December 31, 2015
that were or are subsequently forfeited or expire unexercised) were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2015
.
Outstanding options issued under the Plans are exercisable at the market price on the date of grant, expire
ten
years from the date of grant, and vest or have vested over periods of
two
or
three
years. If provided in the applicable Plan or award agreement, the vesting of stock options may accelerate upon a change of control (as defined in the applicable Plan) of Ventas, Inc. and other specified events.
In connection with the NHP acquisition, we assumed certain outstanding options, shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units previously issued to NHP employees pursuant to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan, as amended (the “NHP Plan”). Any remaining outstanding awards continue to be subject to the terms and conditions of the NHP Plan and the applicable award agreements.
Conversion of Equity Awards at the CCP Spin-Off Date
The Plans were established with anti-dilution provisions, such that in the event of an equity restructuring of Ventas (including spin-off transactions), equity awards would preserve their value post-transaction. In order to achieve an equitable modification of the existing awards following the CCP Spin-Off, we applied the concentration method of converting pre-spin awards to their post-spin value, meaning that Ventas employees remaining at Ventas following the CCP Spin-Off would receive equitably adjusted awards denominated solely in Ventas common stock. The modification assumed a conversion ratio on all awards calculated as the final pre-spin closing price of Ventas common stock divided by the
10
-trading day average post-spin closing price of Ventas common stock (the “10 Day Average Price”). The conversion impacted
120
participants, resulted in additional awards being granted (as summarized in the tables below) and an incremental fair value of both vested awards (
$3.5 million
) and unvested awards (
$1.6 million
) due to the difference between the 10 Day Average Price and the closing price on the CCP Spin-Off date. The vesting periods were unchanged for unvested grants at the CCP Spin-Off date. The incremental fair value of vested awards were recognized immediately and are considered separation costs that are reported in discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income. The incremental fair value of unvested awards, which are also considered separation costs, will be recognized over the remaining requisite service periods. The number of shares reserved for each of the Plans, as well as the ESPP Plan, were adjusted using the same conversion methodology applied to the outstanding awards.
Stock Options
In determining the estimated fair value of our stock options as of the date of grant, we used the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions:
2015
2014
2013
Risk-free interest rate
1.02 - 1.38%
1.3 - 1.4%
0.59 - 0.63%
Dividend yield
5.00
%
5.00
%
5.00
%
Volatility factors of the expected market price for our common stock
19.0 - 20.0%
17.8 - 18.0%
24.2 - 31.7%
Weighted average expected life of options
4.0 years
4.17 years
4.25 - 7.0 years
114
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following is a summary of stock option activity in
2015
:
Shares
Weighted Average
Exercise Price
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life (years)
Intrinsic
Value
($000’s)
Outstanding as of December 31, 2014
2,460,628
$
57.45
Options granted in 2015 pre-spin
792,434
76.62
Options exercised in 2015 pre-spin
130,273
43.30
Options forfeited in 2015 pre-spin
12,058
62.47
Options expired in 2015 pre-spin
2,802
66.43
Options outstanding pre-spin
3,107,929
62.90
Options forfeited/expired at spin
511,832
65.51
Options issued at spin
488,360
52.51
Options outstanding post-spin
3,084,457
52.51
Options granted in 2015 post-spin
—
0.00
Options exercised in 2015 post-spin
20,814
35.13
Options forfeited in 2015 post-spin
11,914
55.67
Options expired in 2015 post-spin
—
0.00
Outstanding as of December 31, 2015
3,051,729
52.62
7.03
$
18,216
Exercisable as of December 31, 2015
2,183,113
$
49.73
6.36
$
16,815
Compensation costs for all share-based awards are based on the grant date fair value and are recognized on a straight-line basis during the requisite service periods. Compensation costs related to stock options for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
were
$4.2 million
,
$4.7 million
and
$4.5 million
, respectively.
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$1.8 million
of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested stock options granted under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.22
years.
The weighted average grant date fair value of options issued during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was
$5.89
,
$4.37
and
$9.25
, respectively.
Aggregate proceeds received from options exercised under the Plans or the NHP Plan for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
were
$6.4 million
,
$26.2 million
and
$7.2 million
, respectively. The total intrinsic value at exercise of options exercised during the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
was
$4.7 million
,
$19.3 million
and
$4.0 million
, respectively.
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units
We recognize the fair value of shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units on the grant date of the award as stock-based compensation expense over the requisite service period, with charges to general and administrative expenses of approximately
$15.2 million
in
2015
,
$16.2 million
in
2014
and
$16.1 million
in
2013
. Restricted stock and restricted stock units generally vest over periods ranging from
two
to
five
years. If provided in the applicable Plan or award agreement, the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units may accelerate upon a change of control (as defined in the applicable Plan) of Ventas and other specified events.
115
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of the status of our non-vested restricted stock and restricted stock units as of
December 31, 2015
, and changes during the year ended
December 31, 2015
follows:
Restricted
Stock
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Restricted
Stock Units
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Nonvested at December 31, 2014
402,741
$
58.51
11,392
$
58.79
Granted in 2015 pre-spin
190,429
75.46
7,252
71.70
Vested in 2015 pre-spin
237,461
61.69
6,856
59.79
Forfeited in 2015 pre-spin
5,602
61.12
0
0.00
Non-vested post-spin
350,107
65.53
11,788
66.15
Forfeited at spin
61,166
64.94
0
0.00
Granted at spin
54,364
2.34
2,216
2.34
Non-vested post-spin
343,305
57.60
14,004
58.02
Granted in 2015 post-spin
31,176
56.12
0
0.00
Vested in 2015 post-spin
3,323
50.49
0
0.00
Forfeited in 2015 post-spin
8,065
52.57
0
0.00
Nonvested at December 31, 2015
363,093
$
57.65
25,500
$
58.02
As of
December 31, 2015
, we had
$9.3 million
of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock and restricted stock units under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.51
years. The total fair value at the vesting date for restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
was
$18.3 million
,
$17.7 million
and
$16.9 million
, respectively.
Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan
We have in effect an Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) under which our employees and directors may purchase shares of our common stock at a discount. Pursuant to the terms of the ESPP, on each purchase date, participants may purchase shares of common stock at a price not less than
90%
of the market price on that date (with respect to the employee tax-favored portion of the plan) and not less than
95%
of the market price on that date (with respect to the additional employee and director portion of the plan). We initially reserved
2,970,350
shares for issuance under the ESPP. As of
December 31, 2015
,
79,893
shares had been purchased under the ESPP and
2,890,457
shares were available for future issuance.
Employee Benefit Plan
We maintain a 401(k) plan that allows eligible employees to defer compensation subject to certain limitations imposed by the Code. In
2015
, we made contributions for each qualifying employee of up to
3.5%
of his or her salary, subject to certain limitations. During
2015
,
2014
and
2013
, our aggregate contributions were approximately
$1,227,000
,
$1,136,000
and
$1,036,000
, respectively.
Note 13—Income Taxes
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Code for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. We have also elected for certain of our subsidiaries to be treated as taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS” or “TRS entities”), which are subject to federal, state and foreign income taxes. All entities other than the TRS entities are collectively referred to as the “REIT” within this Note 13. Certain REIT entities are subject to foreign income tax.
116
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Although we intend to continue to operate in a manner that will enable us to qualify as a REIT, such qualification depends upon our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various distribution, stock ownership and other tests. During the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, our tax treatment of distributions per common share was as follows:
2015
2014
2013
Tax treatment of distributions:
Ordinary income
$
3.02368
$
2.61271
$
2.65787
Qualified ordinary income
0.01632
0.10474
0.03718
Long-term capital gain
—
0.16224
0.03995
Unrecaptured Section 1250 gain
—
0.08531
—
Distribution reported for 1099-DIV purposes
$
3.04000
$
2.96500
$
2.73500
We believe we have met the annual REIT distribution requirement by payment of at least
90%
of our estimated taxable income for
2015
,
2014
and
2013
. Our consolidated benefit for income taxes for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
was as follows:
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Current - Federal
$
138
$
878
$
3,145
Current - State
1,453
—
(461
)
Deferred - Federal
(25,962
)
(3,338
)
(11,860
)
Deferred - State
(3,054
)
(1,772
)
(2,396
)
Current - Foreign
953
327
—
Deferred - Foreign
(12,812
)
(4,827
)
(256
)
Total
$
(39,284
)
$
(8,732
)
$
(11,828
)
The income tax benefit for the year ended
December 31, 2015
is due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses related to certain TRS entities. The income tax benefit for the year ended
December 31, 2014
primarily relates to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses and restructuring related to certain TRS entities.
Although the TRS entities have paid minimal cash federal income taxes for the year ended
December 31, 2015
, their federal income tax liabilities may increase in future years as we exhaust net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and as our senior living operations reportable business segment grows. Such increases could be significant.
A reconciliation of income tax expense and benefit, which is computed by applying the federal corporate tax rate for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, to the income tax benefit is as follows:
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Tax at statutory rate on earnings from continuing operations before unconsolidated entities, noncontrolling interest and income taxes
$
123,086
$
122,746
$
127,463
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
(657
)
(1,152
)
(1,857
)
Increase in valuation allowance
20,978
23,122
7,145
Increase (decrease) in ASC 740 income tax liability
(462
)
878
2,805
Tax at statutory rate on earnings not subject to federal income taxes
(185,648
)
(151,055
)
(146,932
)
Foreign rate differential and foreign taxes
3,095
3,230
—
Change in tax status of TRS
—
(7,380
)
—
Other differences
324
879
(452
)
Income tax expense (benefit)
$
(39,284
)
$
(8,732
)
$
(11,828
)
In connection with our acquisitions of Sunrise Senior Living Real Estate Investment Trust (“Sunrise REIT”) in 2007, and ASLG in 2011, and the Holiday Canada Acquisition in 2014, we established a beginning net deferred tax liability of
$306.3 million
,
$44.6 million
and
$107.7 million
, respectively, related to temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets acquired and liabilities assumed (primarily property, intangible and related assets, net of NOL carryforwards).
117
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
No net deferred tax asset or liability was recorded for the Lillibridge acquisition in 2010 or the acquisition of
three
triple-net leased private hospitals (located in the United Kingdom) in 2014.
In connection with our acquisitions of HCT and Crimson in 2015, we established a beginning net deferred tax liability of
$32.3 million
and
$18.5 million
, respectively, related to temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets acquired and liabilities assumed (primarily property, intangible and related assets, net of NOL carryforwards).
Each TRS is a tax paying component for purposes of classifying deferred tax assets and liabilities. The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards (in addition to the REIT carryforwards) included in the net deferred tax liabilities at
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
are summarized as follows:
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Property, primarily differences in depreciation and amortization, the tax basis of land assets and the treatment of interests and certain costs
$
(413,566
)
$
(406,023
)
$
(309,775
)
Operating loss and interest deduction carryforwards
564,091
398,859
377,645
Expense accruals and other
14,624
15,355
13,421
Valuation allowance
(503,531
)
(352,528
)
(331,458
)
Net deferred tax liabilities
$
(338,382
)
$
(344,337
)
$
(250,167
)
Our net deferred tax liability decreased
$6.0 million
during 2015 primarily due to
$51.8 million
of recorded deferred tax liability as a result of the HCT, Canford, Eglise and Ardent acquisitions, offset by the impact of TRS operating losses and currency translation adjustments. Our net deferred tax liability increased
$94.2 million
during 2014 primarily due to
$107.7 million
of recorded deferred tax liability as a result of the Holiday Canada acquisition.
Due to uncertainty regarding the realization of certain deferred tax assets, we have established valuation allowances, primarily in connection with the NOL carryforwards related to the REIT and certain TRSs. The amounts related to NOLs at the REIT and TRS entities for 2015, 2014, and 2013 are
$369.4 million
and
$85.5 million
,
$251.1 million
and
$66.1 million
, and
$250.0 million
and
$47.0 million
, respectively.
For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the net difference between tax bases and the reported amount of REIT assets and liabilities for federal income tax purposes was approximately
$4.7 billion
and
$4.1 billion
, respectively, less than the book bases of those assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes.
A rollforward of valuation allowances, for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, is as follows:
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
352,528
$
331,458
$
326,837
Additions:
Purchase accounting
172,932
—
613
Expenses
24,332
28,364
31,540
Subtractions:
Deductions
(42,437
)
(2,344
)
(23,622
)
Other activity (not resulting in expense or deduction)
(3,824
)
(4,950
)
(3,910
)
Ending balance
$
503,531
$
352,528
$
331,458
We are subject to corporate level taxes for any asset dispositions during the
five
-year period immediately after the assets were owned by a C corporation (either prior to our REIT election, through stock acquisition or merger) (“built-in gains tax”). The amount of income potentially subject to built-in gains tax is generally equal to the lesser of the excess of the fair value of the asset over its adjusted tax basis as of the date it became a REIT asset or the actual amount of gain. Some, but not all, future gains could be offset by available NOL carryforwards.
Generally, we are subject to audit under the statute of limitations by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the year ended December 31, 2012 and subsequent years and are subject to audit by state taxing authorities for the year ended December 31, 2011 and subsequent years. We are subject to audit by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) and provincial authorities with respect to entities acquired or formed in connection with our 2007 acquisition of Sunrise Senior Living Real
118
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estate Investment Trust generally for periods subsequent to the acquisition. We are also subject to audit in Canada for periods subsequent to the acquisition, and certain prior periods, with respect to the entities acquired in connection with the Holiday Canada Acquisition.
At
December 31, 2015
, we had a combined NOL carryforward of
$460.2 million
related to the TRS entities and an NOL carryforward of
$1.1 billion
related to the REIT, including
$18.6 million
and
$442.6 million
of the REIT NOL carried over from the HCT and Ardent acquisitions, respectively. Additionally,
$10.5 million
of Federal income tax credits were carried over from the Ardent entities. These amounts can be used to offset future taxable income (and/or taxable income for prior years if an audit determines that tax is owed), if any. The REIT will be entitled to utilize NOLs and tax credit carryforwards only to the extent that REIT taxable income exceeds our deduction for dividends paid. Lillibridge, ASLG and Ardent NOL and credit carryforwards are limited as to their utilization by Section 382 of the Code. The NOL carryforwards begin to expire in 2024 with respect to the TRS entities and in 2019 for the REIT.
As a result of our uncertainty regarding the use of existing REIT NOLs, we have not ascribed any net deferred tax benefit to REIT NOL carryforwards as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
. The IRS may challenge our entitlement to these tax attributes during its review of the tax returns for the previous tax years. We believe we are entitled to these tax attributes but cannot assure you as to the outcome of these matters.
The following table summarizes the activity related to our unrecognized tax benefits:
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Balance as of January 1
$
25,446
$
21,906
Additions to tax positions related to the current year
—
4,507
Additions to tax positions related to prior years
248
126
Subtractions to tax positions related to prior years
(677
)
(129
)
Subtractions to tax positions related to settlements
—
—
Subtractions to tax positions as a result of the lapse of the statute of limitations
(882
)
(964
)
Balance as of December 31
$
24,135
$
25,446
Included in these unrecognized tax benefits of
$24.1 million
and
$25.4 million
at
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively, were
$22.5 million
and
$23.9 million
of tax benefits at
December 31, 2015
and
2014
, respectively, that, if recognized, would reduce our annual effective tax rate. We accrued interest of
$0.4 million
related to the unrecognized tax benefits during 2015, but
no
penalties. We expect our unrecognized tax benefits to decrease by
$3.4 million
during
2016
.
As a part of the transfer pricing structure in the normal course of business, the REIT enters into transactions with certain TRSs, such as leasing transactions, other capital financing and allocation of general and administrative costs, which transactions are intended to comply with Internal Revenue Service and foreign tax authority transfer pricing rules.
Note 14—Commitments and Contingencies
Certain Obligations, Liabilities and Litigation
We may be subject to various obligations, liabilities and litigation assumed in connection with or arising out of our acquisitions or otherwise arising in connection with our business, some of which may be indemnifiable by third parties. If these liabilities are greater than expected or were not known to us at the time of acquisition, if we are not entitled to indemnification, or if the responsible third party fails to indemnify us, such obligations, liabilities and litigation could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, in connection with the sale or leasing of our properties, we may incur various obligations and liabilities, including indemnification obligations to the buyer or tenant, relating to the operations of those properties, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Other
With respect to certain of our properties, we are subject to operating and ground lease obligations that generally require fixed monthly or annual rent payments and may include escalation clauses and renewal options. These leases have terms that expire during the next
86
years, excluding extension options. Our future minimum lease obligations under non-cancelable operating and ground leases as of
December 31, 2015
were
$31.3 million
in
2016
,
$24.6 million
in
2017
,
$20.3 million
in
2018
,
$17.0 million
in
2019
,
$16.4 million
in
2020
, and
$520.0 million
thereafter.
119
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 15—Earnings Per Share
The following table shows the amounts used in computing our basic and diluted earnings per common share:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Numerator for basic and diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
406,740
$
376,032
$
374,338
Discontinued operations
11,103
99,735
79,171
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
475,767
$
453,509
Denominator:
Denominator for basic earnings per share—weighted average shares
330,311
294,175
292,654
Effect of dilutive securities:
Stock options
360
495
534
Restricted stock awards
41
55
99
OP units
3,295
1,952
1,823
Denominator for diluted earnings per share—adjusted weighted average shares
334,007
296,677
295,110
Basic earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
1.23
$
1.28
$
1.28
Discontinued operations
0.03
0.34
0.27
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.26
$
1.62
$
1.55
Diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
1.22
$
1.26
$
1.27
Discontinued operations
0.03
0.34
0.27
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.25
$
1.60
$
1.54
There were
852,805
,
479,291
and
504,815
anti-dilutive options outstanding for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
, respectively.
Note 16—Litigation
Litigation Relating to the HCT Acquisition
In the weeks following the announcement on June 2, 2014 of our agreement to acquire HCT, a total of
13
putative class actions were filed by purported HCT stockholders challenging the transaction. Certain of the actions also purport to bring derivative claims on behalf of HCT. Among other things, the lawsuits allege that the directors of HCT breached their fiduciary duties by approving the transaction and that we and our subsidiaries, Stripe Sub, LLC and Stripe OP, LP, aided and abetted this purported breach of fiduciary duty. The complaints seek injunctive relief and damages.
Ten
of these actions were filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland and consolidated under the caption In re: American Realty Capital, Healthcare Trust, Inc. Shareholder & Derivative Litigation, Case No. 24-C-14-003534,
two
actions were filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, and
one
action was filed in the United States District Court of Maryland.
On January 2, 2015, the parties to the consolidated Maryland state court action entered into a memorandum of understanding that contemplated the settlement of the Maryland action and the release of all claims that could be brought by or on behalf of any HCT stockholder related to the HCT acquisition, including all claims asserted on behalf of each alleged class of HCT stockholders. The proposed settlement terms require HCT to make certain additional disclosures related to the merger, which were set forth in HCT's Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 2, 2015.
On January 5, 2015, the parties to the federal action also entered into a memorandum of understanding that contemplated the settlement of the federal action and the release of all claims that could be brought by or on behalf of any HCT stockholder related to the HCT acquisition, including all claims asserted on behalf of each alleged class of HCT stockholders. The proposed
120
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
settlement terms required HCT to make certain additional disclosures related to the merger, which were set forth in HCT's Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2015.
On August 24, 2015, the plaintiffs in the Maryland state court action submitted a stipulation of settlement to the court executed by the parties and moved for preliminary approval of the settlement. The plaintiffs in the Maryland federal action have agreed to allow the settlement to proceed through the state court and do not currently plan to submit an additional stipulation to the federal court. On December 10, 2015, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland entered a preliminary approval order that, among other things, directed notice be sent to members of the class of HCT stockholders and scheduled a settlement hearing to be held on March 15, 2016, at which time the court will review any objections lodged by class members and consider the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the settlement. The settlement is contingent on final court approval after the settlement hearing. There can be no assurance that the court will approve the proposed settlement.
We believe that each of these actions is without merit.
Proceedings against Tenants, Operators and Managers
From time to time, Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred, Atria, Sunrise and our other tenants, operators and managers are parties to certain legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims arising in the conduct of their business and operations. Even though we generally are not party to these proceedings, the unfavorable resolution of any such actions, investigations or claims could, individually or in the aggregate, materially adversely affect such tenants’, operators’ or managers’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations and their ability to satisfy their respective obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Proceedings Indemnified and Defended by Third Parties
From time to time, we are party to certain legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims for which third parties are contractually obligated to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless. The tenants of our triple-net leased properties and, in some cases, their affiliates are required by the terms of their leases and other agreements with us to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against certain actions, investigations and claims arising in the course of their business and related to the operations of our triple-net leased properties. In addition, third parties from whom we acquired certain of our assets and, in some cases, their affiliates are required by the terms of the related conveyance documents to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against certain actions, investigations and claims related to the acquired assets and arising prior to our ownership or related to excluded assets and liabilities. In some cases, a portion of the purchase price consideration is held in escrow for a specified period of time as collateral for these indemnification obligations. We are presently being defended by certain tenants and other obligated third parties in these types of matters. We cannot assure you that our tenants, their affiliates or other obligated third parties will continue to defend us in these matters, that our tenants, their affiliates or other obligated third parties will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their defense and indemnification obligations to us or that any purchase price consideration held in escrow will be sufficient to satisfy claims for which we are entitled to indemnification. The unfavorable resolution of any such actions, investigations or claims could, individually or in the aggregate, materially adversely affect our tenants’ or other obligated third parties’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations and their ability to satisfy their respective obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Proceedings Arising in Connection with Senior Living and MOB Operations; Other Litigation
From time to time, we are party to various legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims (some of which may not be insured and some of which may allege large damage amounts) arising in connection with our senior living and MOB operations or otherwise in the course of our business. In limited circumstances, the manager of the applicable seniors housing community or MOB may be contractually obligated to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against such actions, investigations and claims. It is the opinion of management that, except as otherwise set forth in this Note 16, the disposition of any such actions, investigations and claims that are currently pending will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a Material Adverse Effect on us. However, regardless of their merits, we may be forced to expend significant financial resources to defend and resolve these matters. We are unable to predict the ultimate outcome of these actions, investigations and claims, and if management’s assessment of our liability with respect thereto is incorrect, such actions, investigations and claims could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
121
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 17—Permanent and Temporary Equity
Capital Stock
In January 2015, in connection with the HCT acquisition, we issued approximately
28.4 million
shares of our common stock and
1.1 million
Class C Units that are redeemable for our common stock. In April 2015, third party investors redeemed
445,541
Class C Units for approximately
$32.6 million
. Beginning on January 16, 2016 and as of February 10, 2016, third party investors executed redemption right exercise notices for Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. to redeem
303,136
Class C Units. We expect that the Class C Units will be redeemed through the issuance of
303,136
shares of Ventas common stock on or before April 1, 2016, but we have the right to redeem the Class Units for a cash amount.
In March 2013, we established an “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program through which we could sell from time to time up to an aggregate of
$750 million
of our common stock. In January 2015, we issued and sold
3,750,202
shares of common stock under our previous ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$285.4 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$4.4 million
. In March 2015, we replaced our previous shelf registration statement that was scheduled to expire in accordance with the SEC’s rules with a new universal shelf registration statement, rendering our previous ATM program inaccessible. In connection with our new universal shelf registration statement, we established a new ATM program pursuant to which we may sell, from time to time, up to an aggregate of
$1.0 billion
of our common stock. Through
December 31, 2015
, we have issued and sold a total of
3,434,839
shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$206.2 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$3.1 million
. As of
December 31, 2015
, approximately
$790.7 million
of our common stock remained available for sale under our ATM equity offering program. Subsequent to
December 31, 2015
, we have issued and sold a total of
1,649,463
shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$90.8 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$1.4 million
.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, we issued and sold a total of
3,381,678
shares of common stock under the ATM program for aggregate net proceeds of
$242.3 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$3.7 million
.
For the year ended December 31, 2013, we issued and sold a total of
2,069,200
shares of common stock under the ATM program for aggregate net proceeds of
$141.5 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$2.1 million
.
Excess Share Provision
In order to preserve our ability to maintain REIT status, our Charter provides that if a person acquires beneficial ownership of more than
9%
of our outstanding common stock or
9.9%
of our outstanding preferred stock, the shares that are beneficially owned in excess of such limit are deemed to be excess shares. These shares are automatically deemed transferred to a trust for the benefit of a charitable institution or other qualifying organization selected by our Board of Directors. The trust is entitled to all dividends with respect to the shares and the trustee may exercise all voting power over the shares.
We have the right to buy the excess shares for a purchase price equal to the lesser of the price per share in the transaction that created the excess shares or the market price on the date we buy the shares, and we may defer payment of the purchase price for the excess shares for up to
five
years. If we do not purchase the excess shares, the trustee of the trust is required to transfer the excess shares at the direction of the Board of Directors. The owner of the excess shares is entitled to receive the lesser of the proceeds from the sale or the original purchase price for such excess shares, and any additional amounts are payable to the beneficiary of the trust.
Our Board of Directors is empowered to grant waivers from the excess share provisions of our Charter.
Distribution Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan
Prior to its suspension in July 2014, our Distribution Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan (“DRIP”) enabled existing stockholders to purchase shares of common stock by reinvesting all or a portion of the cash distribution on their shares of our common stock, subject to certain limits. Existing stockholders and new investors also could purchase shares of our common stock under the DRIP by making optional cash payments, subject to certain limits. In 2014, we offered a
1%
discount on the purchase price of our common stock to shareholders who reinvested their dividends or made optional cash purchases through the DRIP. We may determine whether or not to reinstate the DRIP at any time at our sole discretion, and if so, the amount and availability of this discount will be at our discretion. The granting of a discount for one month or quarter, as applicable, will not insure the availability or amount of a discount in future periods, and each month or quarter, as applicable, we may lower or eliminate the discount without prior notice. In addition, we may change our determination as to whether common shares will be purchased by the plan administrator directly from us or in the open market without prior notice to investors.
122
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
The following is a summary of our accumulated other comprehensive income as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
:
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Foreign currency translation
$
(13,926
)
$
866
Unrealized gain on marketable securities
1,738
6,785
Other
4,623
5,470
Total accumulated other comprehensive income
$
(7,565
)
$
13,121
Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interest
The following is a rollforward of our redeemable OP unitholder interests and noncontrolling interests for
2015
:
Redeemable OP Unitholder Interests
Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests
Total Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
(In thousands)
Balance as of December 31, 2014
$
159,135
$
12,880
$
172,015
New issuances
87,245
—
87,245
Change in valuation
(7,832
)
(1,082
)
(8,914
)
Distributions and other
(15,095
)
(491
)
(15,586
)
Redemptions
(34,907
)
(3,324
)
(38,231
)
Balance as of December 31, 2015
$
188,546
$
7,983
$
196,529
Note 18—Related Party Transactions
As disclosed in “Note 3 - Concentration of Credit Risk”, Atria provides comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to our seniors housing communities that Atria operates, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements. Most of our management agreements with Atria have initial terms expiring either July 31, 2024, or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic
ten
-year renewal periods. The management fees payable to Atria under most of the Atria management agreements range from
4.5%
to
5%
of revenues generated by the applicable properties, and Atria can earn up to an additional
1%
of revenues based on the achievement of specified performance targets. Atria also provides certain construction and development management services relating to various development and redevelopment projects within our seniors housing portfolio. For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, we incurred fees to Atria of
$58 million
,
$52.7 million
and
$44.2 million
respectively, the majority of which are recorded within property-level operating expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
As disclosed in “Note 4 - Acquisitions of Real Estate Property”, we leased
ten
hospital campuses to Ardent pursuant to a single, triple-net master lease agreement. Pursuant to our master lease agreement, Ardent is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually by the lesser of
four
times the increase in the consumer price index for the relevant period and
2.5%
. The initial term of the master lease expires on August 31, 2035 and Ardent has
one
ten-year renewal option. For the period from the closing of the Ardent Transaction through December 31, 2015, we recognized rental income from Ardent of
$42.9 million
. We also paid certain transaction-related fees to Ardent of
$40.0 million
, which are recorded within merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
These transactions are considered to be arm’s length in nature.
123
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 19—Quarterly Financial Information (Unaudited)
Summarized unaudited consolidated quarterly information for the years ended
December 31, 2015
and
2014
is provided below.
For the Year Ended December 31, 2015
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues (1)
$
805,598
$
811,920
$
827,606
$
841,274
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions (1)
$
102,868
$
131,578
$
45,235
$
127,059
Discontinued operations (1)
17,574
18,243
(22,383
)
(2,331
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
120,442
$
149,821
$
22,852
$
124,728
Earnings per share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
0.32
$
0.39
$
0.14
$
0.38
Discontinued operations
0.05
0.06
(0.07
)
(0.01
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.37
$
0.45
$
0.07
$
0.37
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
0.32
$
0.40
$
0.14
$
0.38
Discontinued operations
0.05
0.05
(0.07
)
(0.01
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.37
$
0.45
$
0.07
$
0.37
Dividends declared per share
$
0.79
$
0.79
$
0.73
$
0.73
________________________
(1)
The amounts presented for the three months ended March 31,
2015
and June 30,
2015
differ from the amounts previously reported in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q as a result of properties not previously included in discontinued operations in the respective reporting periods.
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
2015
June 30,
2015
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues, previously reported in Form 10-Q
$
884,024
$
891,322
Revenues, previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-Q
(78,426
)
(79,402
)
Total revenues disclosed in Form 10-K
$
805,598
$
811,920
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions, previously reported in Form 10-Q
$
120,865
$
149,754
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions, previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-Q
(17,997
)
(18,176
)
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions disclosed in Form 10-K
$
102,868
$
131,578
Discontinued operations, previously reported in Form 10-Q
$
(423
)
$
67
Operations from properties previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-Q
17,997
18,176
Discontinued operations disclosed in Form 10-K
$
17,574
$
18,243
124
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the Year Ended December 31, 2014
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues (1)
$
665,262
$
674,529
$
704,932
$
732,090
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions (1)
$
90,973
$
107,617
$
90,961
$
86,481
Discontinued operations (1)
30,074
30,781
18,171
20,709
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
121,047
$
138,398
$
109,132
$
107,190
Earnings per share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
0.31
$
0.37
$
0.28
$
0.29
Discontinued operations
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.07
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.47
$
0.33
$
0.36
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
0.31
$
0.37
$
0.27
$
0.29
Discontinued operations
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.07
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.47
$
0.32
$
0.36
Dividends declared per share
$
0.725
$
0.725
$
0.725
$
0.79
________________________
(1)
The amounts presented for the three months ended March 31,
2014
, June 30,
2014
, September 30,
2014
and
December 31, 2014
differ from the amounts previously reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2014
as a result of properties not previously included in discontinued operations as of
December 31, 2014
.
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
2014
June 30,
2014
September 30,
2014
December 31,
2014
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
741,470
$
751,254
$
779,035
$
803,987
Revenues, previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-K
(76,208
)
(76,725
)
(74,103
)
(71,897
)
Total revenues disclosed in Form 10-K
$
665,262
$
674,529
$
704,932
$
732,090
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
118,016
$
138,653
$
109,391
$
107,601
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions, previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-K
(27,043
)
(31,036
)
(18,430
)
(21,120
)
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions disclosed in Form 10-K
$
90,973
$
107,617
$
90,961
$
86,481
Discontinued operations, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
3,031
$
(255
)
$
(259
)
$
(411
)
Operations from properties previously reported in continuing operations in Form 10-K
27,043
31,036
18,430
21,120
Discontinued operations disclosed in Form 10-K
$
30,074
$
30,781
$
18,171
$
20,709
125
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 20—Segment Information
As of
December 31, 2015
,
2014
and
2013
we operated through
three
reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and MOB operations. Under our triple-net leased properties segment, we invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our MOB operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease, and manage MOBs throughout the United States. Information provided for “all other” includes income from loans and investments and other miscellaneous income and various corporate-level expenses not directly attributable to our three reportable business segments. Assets included in “all other” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, deferred financing costs, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable.
We evaluate performance of the combined properties in each reportable business segment based on segment profit, which we define as NOI adjusted for income/loss from unconsolidated entities. We define NOI as total revenues, less interest and other income, property-level operating expenses and medical office building services costs. We consider segment profit useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to measure unlevered property-level operating results and to compare our operating results to the operating results of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis. In order to facilitate a clear understanding of our historical consolidated historical operating results, segment profit should be examined in conjunction with net income as presented in our Consolidated Financial Statements and other financial data included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Interest expense, depreciation and amortization, general, administrative and professional fees, income tax expense, discontinued operations and other non-property specific revenues and expenses are not allocated to individual reportable business segments for purposes of assessing segment performance. There are no intersegment sales or transfers.
126
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Summary information by reportable business segment is as follows:
For the year ended
December 31, 2015
:
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
MOB
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
779,801
$
—
$
566,245
$
—
$
1,346,046
Resident fees and services
—
1,811,255
—
—
1,811,255
Medical office building and other services revenue
4,433
—
34,436
2,623
41,492
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
86,553
86,553
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,052
1,052
Total revenues
$
784,234
$
1,811,255
$
600,681
$
90,228
$
3,286,398
Total revenues
$
784,234
$
1,811,255
$
600,681
$
90,228
$
3,286,398
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,052
1,052
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,209,415
174,225
—
1,383,640
Medical office building services costs
—
—
26,565
—
26,565
Segment NOI
784,234
601,840
399,891
89,176
1,875,141
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(813
)
(526
)
369
(450
)
(1,420
)
Segment profit
$
783,421
$
601,314
$
400,260
$
88,726
1,873,721
Interest and other income
1,052
Interest expense
(367,114
)
Depreciation and amortization
(894,057
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(128,035
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(14,411
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(102,944
)
Other
(17,957
)
Income tax benefit
39,284
Discontinued operations
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
18,580
Net income
$
419,222
127
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the year ended
December 31, 2014
:
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
MOB
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
674,547
$
—
$
463,910
$
—
$
1,138,457
Resident fees and services
—
1,552,951
—
—
1,552,951
Medical office building and other services revenue
4,565
—
22,529
2,270
29,364
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
51,778
51,778
Interest and other income
—
—
—
4,263
4,263
Total revenues
$
679,112
$
1,552,951
$
486,439
$
58,311
$
2,776,813
Total revenues
$
679,112
$
1,552,951
$
486,439
$
58,311
$
2,776,813
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
4,263
4,263
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,036,556
158,832
—
1,195,388
Medical office building services costs
—
—
17,092
—
17,092
Segment NOI
679,112
516,395
310,515
54,048
1,560,070
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
859
(658
)
398
(738
)
(139
)
Segment profit
$
679,971
$
515,737
$
310,913
$
53,310
1,559,931
Interest and other income
4,263
Interest expense
(292,065
)
Depreciation and amortization
(725,216
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(121,738
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(5,564
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(43,304
)
Other
(25,743
)
Income tax benefit
8,732
Discontinued operations
99,735
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
Net income
$
477,001
128
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the year ended
December 31, 2013
:
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
MOB
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
586,016
$
—
$
450,340
$
—
$
1,036,356
Resident fees and services
—
1,406,005
—
—
1,406,005
Medical office building and other services revenue
4,469
—
12,077
1,263
17,809
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
54,425
54,425
Interest and other income
—
—
—
2,022
2,022
Total revenues
$
590,485
$
1,406,005
$
462,417
$
57,710
$
2,516,617
Total revenues
$
590,485
$
1,406,005
$
462,417
$
57,710
$
2,516,617
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
2,022
2,022
Property-level operating expenses
—
956,684
153,241
—
1,109,925
Medical office building services costs
—
—
8,315
—
8,315
Segment NOI
590,485
449,321
300,861
55,688
1,396,355
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
475
(1,980
)
1,451
(454
)
(508
)
Segment profit
$
590,960
$
447,341
$
302,312
$
55,234
1,395,847
Interest and other income
2,022
Interest expense
(249,009
)
Depreciation and amortization
(629,908
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(115,083
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(1,201
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(21,634
)
Other
(17,364
)
Income tax benefit
11,828
Discontinued operations
79,171
Net income
$
454,669
Assets by reportable business segment are as follows:
As of December 31,
2015
2014
(Dollars in thousands)
Assets:
Triple-net leased properties
$
7,996,645
35.9
%
$
9,115,901
43.1
%
Senior living operations
8,022,206
36.0
7,421,924
35.1
MOB operations
5,209,751
23.4
3,526,217
16.6
All other assets
1,033,316
4.7
1,101,871
5.2
Total assets
$
22,261,918
100.0
%
$
21,165,913
100.0
%
129
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Capital expenditures, including investments in real estate property and development project expenditures, by reportable business segment are as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Capital expenditures:
Triple-net leased properties
$
1,890,245
$
647,870
$
847,945
Senior living operations
382,877
977,997
576,459
MOB operations
604,827
36,861
189,953
Total capital expenditures
$
2,877,949
$
1,662,728
$
1,614,357
Our portfolio of properties and mortgage loan and other investments are located in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. Revenues are attributed to an individual country based on the location of each property.
Geographic information regarding our operations is as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Revenues:
United States
$
3,086,449
$
2,636,591
$
2,423,399
Canada
173,778
126,435
93,218
United Kingdom
26,171
13,787
—
Total revenues
$
3,286,398
$
2,776,813
$
2,516,617
As of December 31,
2015
2014
(In thousands)
Net real estate property:
United States
$
18,271,829
$
15,334,686
Canada
1,039,561
1,269,710
United Kingdom
313,830
168,594
Total net real estate property
$
19,625,220
$
16,772,990
Note 21—Condensed Consolidating Information
Ventas, Inc. has fully and unconditionally guaranteed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Realty, including the senior notes that were jointly issued with Ventas Capital Corporation. Ventas Capital Corporation is a direct
100%
owned subsidiary of Ventas Realty that has no assets or operations, but was formed in 2002 solely to facilitate offerings of senior notes by a limited partnership. None of our other subsidiaries (such subsidiaries, excluding Ventas Realty and Ventas Capital Corporation, the “Ventas Subsidiaries”) is obligated with respect to Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes.
Ventas, Inc. has also fully and unconditionally guaranteed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited. None of our other subsidiaries is obligated with respect to Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s outstanding senior notes, all of which were issued on a private placement basis in Canada.
In connection with the NHP acquisition, our
100%
owned subsidiary, NHP LLC, as successor to NHP, assumed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by NHP. Neither we nor any of our subsidiaries (other than NHP LLC) is obligated with respect to any of NHP LLC’s outstanding senior notes.
130
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Under certain circumstances, contractual and legal restrictions, including those contained in the instruments governing our subsidiaries’ outstanding mortgage indebtedness, may restrict our ability to obtain cash from our subsidiaries for the purpose of meeting our debt service obligations, including our payment guarantees with respect to Ventas Realty’s and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes. Certain of our real estate assets are also subject to mortgages.
The following summarizes our condensed consolidating information as of
December 31, 2015
and
2014
and for the years ended
December 31, 2015
,
2014
, and
2013
:
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
As of
December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
5,798
$
195,015
$
20,377,226
$
—
$
20,578,039
Cash and cash equivalents
11,733
—
41,290
—
53,023
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
7,154
1,644
69,098
—
77,896
Deferred financing costs, net
—
—
—
—
—
Investment in and advances to affiliates
12,989,643
3,545,183
—
(16,534,826
)
—
Goodwill
—
—
1,047,497
—
1,047,497
Assets held for sale
—
4,488
88,572
—
93,060
Other assets
17,869
4,182
390,352
—
412,403
Total assets
$
13,032,197
$
3,750,512
$
22,014,035
$
(16,534,826
)
$
22,261,918
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
8,370,670
$
2,836,326
$
—
$
11,206,996
Intercompany loans
7,294,158
(6,571,512
)
(722,646
)
—
—
Accrued interest
—
64,561
16,303
—
80,864
Accounts payable and other liabilities
68,604
45,226
665,550
—
779,380
Liabilities held for sale
—
44
34,296
—
34,340
Deferred income taxes
338,382
—
—
—
338,382
Total liabilities
7,701,144
1,908,989
2,829,829
—
12,439,962
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
196,529
—
196,529
Total equity
5,331,053
1,841,523
18,987,677
(16,534,826
)
9,625,427
Total liabilities and equity
$
13,032,197
$
3,750,512
$
22,014,035
$
(16,534,826
)
$
22,261,918
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
131
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
As of
December 31, 2014
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
6,404
$
216,521
$
17,444,818
$
—
$
17,667,743
Cash and cash equivalents
24,857
—
30,491
—
55,348
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
2,102
1,424
68,245
—
71,771
Deferred financing costs, net
—
—
—
—
—
Investment in and advances to affiliates
10,783,780
3,430,055
—
(14,213,835
)
—
Goodwill
—
—
363,971
—
363,971
Assets held for sale
—
150,405
2,404,917
—
2,555,322
Other assets
98,605
41,821
311,332
—
451,758
Total assets
$
10,915,748
$
3,840,226
$
20,623,774
$
(14,213,835
)
$
21,165,913
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
7,371,547
$
3,472,804
$
—
$
10,844,351
Intercompany loans
5,555,196
(5,562,739
)
7,543
—
—
Accrued interest
—
43,212
18,970
—
62,182
Accounts payable and other liabilities
103,469
55,909
591,279
—
750,657
Liabilities held for sale
—
24,398
213,575
—
237,973
Deferred income taxes
344,337
—
—
—
344,337
Total liabilities
6,003,002
1,932,327
4,304,171
—
12,239,500
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
172,016
—
172,016
Total equity
4,912,746
1,907,899
16,147,587
(14,213,835
)
8,754,397
Total liabilities and equity
$
10,915,748
$
3,840,226
$
20,623,774
$
(14,213,835
)
$
21,165,913
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
132
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
3,663
$
198,017
$
1,144,366
$
—
$
1,346,046
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,811,255
—
1,811,255
Medical office building and other services revenues
895
—
40,597
—
41,492
Income from loans and investments
8,605
534
77,414
—
86,553
Equity earnings in affiliates
458,213
—
1,332
(459,545
)
—
Interest and other income
495
(6
)
563
—
1,052
Total revenues
471,871
198,545
3,075,527
(459,545
)
3,286,398
Expenses:
Interest
(38,393
)
257,503
148,004
—
367,114
Depreciation and amortization
5,443
14,679
873,935
—
894,057
Property-level operating expenses
—
367
1,383,273
—
1,383,640
Medical office building services costs
—
—
26,565
—
26,565
General, administrative and professional fees
(321
)
20,777
107,579
—
128,035
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
—
4,523
9,888
—
14,411
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
98,644
75
4,225
—
102,944
Other
(358
)
45
18,270
—
17,957
Total expenses
65,015
297,969
2,571,739
—
2,934,723
Income (loss) before loss from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
406,856
(99,424
)
503,788
(459,545
)
351,675
Loss from unconsolidated entities
—
(183
)
(1,237
)
—
(1,420
)
Income tax benefit
39,284
—
—
—
39,284
Income (loss) from continuing operations
446,140
(99,607
)
502,551
(459,545
)
389,539
Discontinued operations
(46,877
)
34,748
23,232
—
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
18,580
—
—
—
18,580
Net income (loss)
417,843
(64,859
)
525,783
(459,545
)
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,379
—
1,379
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
(64,859
)
$
524,404
$
(459,545
)
$
417,843
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
133
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2014
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
2,789
$
180,907
$
954,761
$
—
$
1,138,457
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,552,951
—
1,552,951
Medical office building and other services revenues
—
—
29,364
—
29,364
Income from loans and investments
3,052
—
48,726
—
51,778
Equity earnings in affiliates
480,267
—
199
(480,466
)
—
Interest and other income
3,314
26
923
—
4,263
Total revenues
489,422
180,933
2,586,924
(480,466
)
2,776,813
Expenses:
Interest
(18,210
)
185,983
124,292
—
292,065
Depreciation and amortization
5,860
15,743
703,613
—
725,216
Property-level operating expenses
1
481
1,194,906
—
1,195,388
Medical office building services costs
—
—
17,092
—
17,092
General, administrative and professional fees
3,910
19,792
98,036
—
121,738
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(3
)
3
5,564
—
5,564
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
26,209
2,110
14,985
—
43,304
Other
9,732
—
16,011
—
25,743
Total expenses
27,499
224,112
2,174,499
—
2,426,110
Income (loss) before income (loss) from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations and noncontrolling interest
461,923
(43,179
)
412,425
(480,466
)
350,703
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
1,250
(1,389
)
—
(139
)
Income tax benefit
8,732
—
—
—
8,732
Income from continuing operations
470,655
(41,929
)
411,036
(480,466
)
359,296
Discontinued operations
(12,858
)
61,755
50,838
—
99,735
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
—
—
—
17,970
Net income
475,767
19,826
461,874
(480,466
)
477,001
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,234
—
1,234
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
19,826
$
460,640
$
(480,466
)
$
475,767
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
134
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2013
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
2,486
$
171,953
$
861,917
$
—
$
1,036,356
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,406,005
—
1,406,005
Medical office building and other services revenues
—
(11
)
17,820
—
17,809
Income from loans and investments
1,262
908
52,255
—
54,425
Equity earnings in affiliates
449,621
—
727
(450,348
)
—
Interest and other income
2,963
26
(967
)
—
2,022
Total revenues
456,332
172,876
2,337,757
(450,348
)
2,516,617
Expenses:
Interest
(2,167
)
144,327
106,849
—
249,009
Depreciation and amortization
4,990
17,248
607,670
—
629,908
Property-level operating expenses
—
514
1,109,411
—
1,109,925
Medical office building services costs
—
—
8,315
—
8,315
General, administrative and professional fees
2,695
20,488
91,900
—
115,083
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt, net
3
1,510
(312
)
—
1,201
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
11,917
—
9,717
—
21,634
Other
194
17
17,153
—
17,364
Total expenses
17,632
184,104
1,950,703
—
2,152,439
Income (loss) before income (loss) from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, and noncontrolling interest
438,700
(11,228
)
387,054
(450,348
)
364,178
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
673
(1,181
)
—
(508
)
Income tax benefit
11,828
—
—
—
11,828
Income (loss) from continuing operations
450,528
(10,555
)
385,873
(450,348
)
375,498
Discontinued operations
2,981
83,197
(7,007
)
—
79,171
Net income
453,509
72,642
378,866
(450,348
)
454,669
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,160
—
1,160
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
453,509
$
72,642
$
377,706
$
(450,348
)
$
453,509
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
135
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income (loss)
$
417,843
$
(64,859
)
$
525,783
$
(459,545
)
$
419,222
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
(14,792
)
—
(14,792
)
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
(5,047
)
—
—
—
(5,047
)
Other
—
—
(847
)
—
(847
)
Total other comprehensive loss
(5,047
)
—
(15,639
)
—
(20,686
)
Comprehensive income (loss)
412,796
(64,859
)
510,144
(459,545
)
398,536
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,379
—
1,379
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
412,796
$
(64,859
)
$
508,765
$
(459,545
)
$
397,157
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2014
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income
$
475,767
$
19,826
$
461,874
$
(480,466
)
$
477,001
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Foreign currency translation
—
—
(17,153
)
—
(17,153
)
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
7,001
—
—
—
7,001
Other
—
—
3,614
—
3,614
Total other comprehensive income (loss)
7,001
—
(13,539
)
—
(6,538
)
Comprehensive income
482,768
19,826
448,335
(480,466
)
470,463
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,234
—
1,234
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
482,768
$
19,826
$
447,101
$
(480,466
)
$
469,229
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
136
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2013
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income
$
453,509
$
72,642
$
378,866
$
(450,348
)
$
454,669
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
(5,422
)
—
(5,422
)
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
(1,023
)
—
—
—
(1,023
)
Other
—
—
2,750
—
2,750
Total other comprehensive loss
(1,023
)
—
(2,672
)
—
(3,695
)
Comprehensive income
452,486
72,642
376,194
(450,348
)
450,974
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,160
—
1,160
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
452,486
$
72,642
$
375,034
$
(450,348
)
$
449,814
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
137
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
$
(124,752
)
$
(6,704
)
$
1,523,223
$
—
$
1,391,767
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,107,862
)
(15,733
)
(300,097
)
—
(2,423,692
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under credit facilities
—
(584,000
)
(139,457
)
—
(723,457
)
Net cash impact of CCP Spin-Off
1,273,000
—
(1,401,749
)
—
(128,749
)
Proceeds from debt
—
2,292,568
220,179
—
2,512,747
Proceeds from debt related to CCP Spin-Off
—
—
1,400,000
—
1,400,000
Repayment of debt
—
(705,000
)
(730,596
)
—
(1,435,596
)
Net change in intercompany debt
1,782,954
(1,008,773
)
(774,181
)
—
—
Purchase of noncontrolling interest
—
—
(3,819
)
—
(3,819
)
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(22,297
)
(2,368
)
—
(24,665
)
Issuance of common stock, net
491,023
—
—
—
491,023
Cash distribution (to) from affiliates
(313,755
)
49,939
263,816
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(1,003,413
)
—
—
—
(1,003,413
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
—
—
(15,095
)
—
(15,095
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
—
—
(33,188
)
—
(33,188
)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(12,649
)
—
(12,649
)
Other
6,983
—
—
—
6,983
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
2,236,792
22,437
(1,229,107
)
—
1,030,122
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
4,178
—
(5,981
)
—
(1,803
)
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(17,302
)
—
16,780
—
(522
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
24,857
—
30,491
—
55,348
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
11,733
$
—
$
41,290
$
—
$
53,023
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
138
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2014
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
$
(95,660
)
$
81,378
$
1,269,127
$
—
$
1,254,845
Net cash used in investing activities
(1,358,256
)
(7,749
)
(689,035
)
—
(2,055,040
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facility
—
386,000
154,203
—
540,203
Proceeds from debt
—
696,661
1,311,046
—
2,007,707
Repayment of debt
—
—
(1,151,395
)
—
(1,151,395
)
Net change in intercompany debt
1,300,790
(895,961
)
(404,829
)
—
—
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(6,608
)
(7,612
)
—
(14,220
)
Issuance of common stock, net
242,107
—
—
—
242,107
Cash distribution from (to) affiliates
776,826
(253,726
)
(523,100
)
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(875,614
)
—
—
—
(875,614
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(5,762
)
—
—
—
(5,762
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
(503
)
—
—
—
(503
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
—
—
491
—
491
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(9,559
)
—
(9,559
)
Other
24,597
5
—
—
24,602
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
1,462,441
(73,629
)
(630,755
)
—
758,057
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
8,525
—
(50,663
)
—
(42,138
)
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(11,837
)
—
14,507
—
2,670
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
28,169
—
66,647
—
94,816
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
24,857
$
—
$
30,491
$
—
$
55,348
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
139
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2013
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
$
(8,596
)
$
149,734
$
1,053,617
$
—
$
1,194,755
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
(1,416,336
)
(6,122
)
139,698
—
(1,282,760
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facilities
—
(168,000
)
3,971
—
(164,029
)
Proceeds from debt
—
2,330,435
437,111
—
2,767,546
Repayment of debt
—
(400,000
)
(1,392,492
)
—
(1,792,492
)
Net change in intercompany debt
2,149,080
(1,881,988
)
(267,092
)
—
—
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(29,586
)
(1,691
)
—
(31,277
)
Issuance of common stock, net
141,343
—
—
—
141,343
Cash distribution (to) from affiliates
(54,852
)
5,610
49,242
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(802,123
)
—
—
—
(802,123
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(5,040
)
—
—
—
(5,040
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
(659
)
—
—
—
(659
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
—
—
2,395
—
2,395
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(9,286
)
—
(9,286
)
Other
8,618
—
—
—
8,618
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
1,436,367
(143,529
)
(1,177,842
)
—
114,996
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
11,435
83
15,473
—
26,991
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
—
(83
)
—
—
(83
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
16,734
—
51,174
—
67,908
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
28,169
$
—
$
66,647
$
—
$
94,816
(1)
Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes were issued jointly with our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation, which has no assets or operations.
140
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
December 31, 2015
(Dollars in Thousands)
Allowance Accounts
Additions
Deductions
Year Ended December 31,
Balance at Beginning of Year
Charged to Earnings
Acquired Properties
Uncollectible Accounts Written-off
Disposed Properties
Balance at End of Year
2015
Allowance for doubtful accounts
11,460
10,937
753
(12,977
)
3,373
$
13,546
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
83,461
35,448
—
—
(17,491
)
$
101,418
94,921
46,385
753
(12,977
)
(14,118
)
114,964
2014
Allowance for doubtful accounts
9,624
8,204
—
(4,272
)
(2,096
)
$
11,460
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
60,787
46,503
—
462
(24,291
)
$
83,461
70,411
54,707
—
(3,810
)
(26,387
)
94,921
2013
Allowance for doubtful accounts
11,090
6,071
—
(6,013
)
(1,524
)
$
9,624
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
59,731
42,940
—
(1,252
)
(40,632
)
$
60,787
70,821
49,011
—
(7,265
)
(42,156
)
70,411
141
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
December 31, 2015
(Dollars in Thousands)
For the Years Ended December 31,
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Reconciliation of real estate:
Carrying cost:
Balance at beginning of period
$
19,241,735
$
20,393,411
$
18,763,903
Additions during period:
Acquisitions
4,063,355
1,769,790
1,623,648
Capital expenditures
229,560
189,711
183,929
Dispositions:
Sales and/or transfers to assets held for sale
(867,158
)
(3,023,401
)
(155,184
)
Foreign currency translation
(209,460
)
(87,776
)
(22,885
)
Balance at end of period
$
22,458,032
$
19,241,735
$
20,393,411
Accumulated depreciation:
Balance at beginning of period
$
2,925,508
$
2,881,950
$
2,289,783
Additions during period:
Depreciation expense
778,419
725,485
674,141
Dispositions:
Sales and/or transfers to assets held for sale
(144,545
)
(675,846
)
(78,061
)
Foreign currency translation
(14,757
)
(6,081
)
(3,913
)
Balance at end of period
$
3,544,625
$
2,925,508
$
2,881,950
142
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
December 31, 2015
(Dollars in Thousands)
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
Canyonwood Nursing and Rehab Center
Redding
CA
—
401
3,784
—
401
3,784
4,185
2,295
1,890
1989
1989
45 years
The Tunnell Center for Rehabilitation & Heathcare
San Francisco
CA
—
1,902
7,531
—
1,902
7,531
9,433
6,081
3,352
1967
1993
28 years
Lawton Healthcare Center
San Francisco
CA
—
943
514
—
943
514
1,457
513
944
1962
1996
20 years
Valley Gardens Health Care & Rehabilitation Center
Stockton
CA
—
516
3,405
—
516
3,405
3,921
2,133
1,788
1988
1988
29 years
Aurora Care Center
Aurora
CO
—
197
2,328
—
197
2,328
2,525
1,826
699
1962
1995
30 years
Lafayette Nursing and Rehab Center
Fayetteville
GA
—
598
6,623
—
598
6,623
7,221
6,528
693
1989
1995
20 years
Canyon West Health and Rehabilitation Center
Caldwell
ID
—
312
2,050
—
312
2,050
2,362
1,017
1,345
1974
1998
45 years
Mountain Valley Care & Rehabilitation Center
Kellogg
ID
—
68
1,280
—
68
1,280
1,348
1,310
38
1971
1984
25 years
Lewiston Rehabilitation & Care Center
Lewiston
ID
—
133
3,982
—
133
3,982
4,115
3,593
522
1964
1984
29 years
Aspen Park Healthcare
Moscow
ID
—
261
2,571
—
261
2,571
2,832
2,577
255
1955
1990
25 years
Nampa Care Center
Nampa
ID
—
252
2,810
—
252
2,810
3,062
2,712
350
1950
1983
25 years
Weiser Rehabilitation & Care Center
Weiser
ID
—
157
1,760
—
157
1,760
1,917
1,827
90
1963
1983
25 years
Wedgewood Healthcare Center
Clarksville
IN
—
119
5,115
—
119
5,115
5,234
3,659
1,575
1985
1995
35 years
Columbus Health and Rehabilitation Center
Columbus
IN
—
345
6,817
—
345
6,817
7,162
6,668
494
1966
1991
25 years
Harrison Health and Rehabilitation Centre
Corydon
IN
—
125
6,068
—
125
6,068
6,193
2,448
3,745
1998
1998
45 years
Valley View Health Care Center
Elkhart
IN
—
87
2,665
—
87
2,665
2,752
2,429
323
1985
1993
25 years
Wildwood Health Care Center
Indianapolis
IN
—
134
4,983
—
134
4,983
5,117
4,515
602
1988
1993
25 years
Windsor Estates Health & Rehab Center
Kokomo
IN
—
256
6,625
—
256
6,625
6,881
4,595
2,286
1962
1995
35 years
Rolling Hills Health Care Center
New Albany
IN
—
81
1,894
—
81
1,894
1,975
1,730
245
1984
1993
25 years
Southwood Health & Rehabilitation Center
Terre Haute
IN
—
90
2,868
(8
)
82
2,868
2,950
2,613
337
1988
1993
25 years
143
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Maple Manor Health Care Center
Greenville
KY
—
59
3,187
—
59
3,187
3,246
2,728
518
1968
1990
30 years
Eagle Pond Rehabilitation and Living Center
South Dennis
MA
—
296
6,896
—
296
6,896
7,192
4,129
3,063
1985
1987
50 years
Harrington House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Walpole
MA
—
4
4,444
—
4
4,444
4,448
2,483
1,965
1991
1991
45 years
Parkview Acres Care and Rehabilitation Center
Dillon
MT
—
207
2,578
—
207
2,578
2,785
2,064
721
1965
1993
29 years
Park Place Health Care Center
Great Falls
MT
—
600
6,311
—
600
6,311
6,911
5,035
1,876
1963
1993
28 years
Greenbriar Terrace Healthcare
Nashua
NH
—
776
6,011
—
776
6,011
6,787
5,775
1,012
1963
1990
25 years
Rose Manor Healthcare Center
Durham
NC
—
200
3,527
—
200
3,527
3,727
3,298
429
1972
1991
26 years
Guardian Care of Elizabeth City
Elizabeth City
NC
—
71
561
—
71
561
632
632
—
1977
1982
20 years
Guardian Care of Henderson
Henderson
NC
—
206
1,997
—
206
1,997
2,203
1,590
613
1957
1993
29 years
Birchwood Terrace Healthcare
Burlington
VT
—
15
4,656
—
15
4,656
4,671
4,662
9
1965
1990
27 years
Nansemond Pointe Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Suffolk
VA
—
534
6,990
—
534
6,990
7,524
5,357
2,167
1963
1991
32 years
River Pointe Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Virginia Beach
VA
—
770
4,440
—
770
4,440
5,210
4,396
814
1953
1991
25 years
Bay Pointe Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Virginia Beach
VA
—
805
2,886
(380
)
425
2,886
3,311
2,242
1,069
1971
1993
29 years
Arden Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Seattle
WA
—
1,111
4,013
—
1,111
4,013
5,124
3,202
1,922
1950
1993
28.5 years
Lakewood Healthcare Center
Tacoma
WA
—
504
3,511
—
504
3,511
4,015
2,370
1,645
1989
1989
45 years
Vancouver Health & Rehabilitation Center
Vancouver
WA
—
449
2,964
—
449
2,964
3,413
2,426
987
1970
1993
28 years
TOTAL KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
13,584
140,645
(388
)
13,196
140,645
153,841
113,458
40,383
NON-KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
Cherry Hills Health Care Center
Englewood
CO
—
241
2,180
194
241
2,374
2,615
1,823
792
1960
1995
30 years
Brookdale Lisle SNF
Lisle
IL
—
730
9,270
—
730
9,270
10,000
2,373
7,627
1990
2009
35 years
Lopatcong Center
Phillipsburg
NJ
—
1,490
12,336
—
1,490
12,336
13,826
5,247
8,579
1982
2004
30 years
Marietta Convalescent Center
Marietta
OH
—
158
3,266
75
158
3,341
3,499
3,065
434
1972
1993
25 years
The Belvedere
Chester
PA
—
822
7,203
—
822
7,203
8,025
3,052
4,973
1899
2004
30 years
Pennsburg Manor
Pennsburg
PA
—
1,091
7,871
—
1,091
7,871
8,962
3,393
5,569
1982
2004
30 years
Chapel Manor
Philadelphia
PA
—
1,595
13,982
1,358
1,595
15,340
16,935
6,575
10,360
1948
2004
30 years
Wayne Center
Strafford
PA
—
662
6,872
850
662
7,722
8,384
3,495
4,889
1897
2004
30 years
144
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Everett Rehabilitation & Care
Everett
WA
—
2,750
27,337
—
2,750
27,337
30,087
3,829
26,258
1995
2011
35 years
Northwest Continuum Care Center
Longview
WA
—
145
2,563
171
145
2,734
2,879
2,147
732
1955
1992
29 years
SunRise Care & Rehab Moses Lake
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
17,439
—
660
17,439
18,099
2,526
15,573
1972
2011
35 years
SunRise Care & Rehab Lake Ridge
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
8,866
—
660
8,866
9,526
1,345
8,181
1988
2011
35 years
Rainier Vista Care Center
Puyallup
WA
—
520
4,780
305
520
5,085
5,605
2,998
2,607
1986
1991
40 years
Logan Center
Logan
WV
—
300
12,959
—
300
12,959
13,259
1,833
11,426
1987
2011
35 years
Ravenswood Healthcare Center
Ravenswood
WV
—
320
12,710
—
320
12,710
13,030
1,803
11,227
1987
2011
35 years
Valley Center
South Charleston
WV
—
750
24,115
—
750
24,115
24,865
3,459
21,406
1987
2011
35 years
White Sulphur
White Sulphur Springs
WV
—
250
13,055
—
250
13,055
13,305
1,864
11,441
1987
2011
35 years
TOTAL NON-KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
13,144
186,804
2,953
13,144
189,757
202,901
50,827
152,074
TOTAL FOR SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
26,728
327,449
2,565
26,340
330,402
356,742
164,285
192,457
SPECIALTY HOSPITALS
Kindred Hospital - Arizona - Phoenix
Phoenix
AZ
—
226
3,359
—
226
3,359
3,585
2,696
889
1980
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Tucson
Tucson
AZ
—
130
3,091
—
130
3,091
3,221
2,913
308
1969
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - Brea
Brea
CA
—
3,144
2,611
—
3,144
2,611
5,755
1,327
4,428
1990
1995
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Ontario
Ontario
CA
—
523
2,988
—
523
2,988
3,511
2,867
644
1950
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Diego
San Diego
CA
—
670
11,764
—
670
11,764
12,434
11,254
1,180
1965
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Francisco Bay Area
San Leandro
CA
—
2,735
5,870
—
2,735
5,870
8,605
6,093
2,512
1962
1993
25 years
Kindred Hospital - Westminster
Westminster
CA
—
727
7,384
—
727
7,384
8,111
7,561
550
1973
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Denver
Denver
CO
—
896
6,367
—
896
6,367
7,263
6,695
568
1963
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Coral Gables
Coral Gables
FL
—
1,071
5,348
—
1,071
5,348
6,419
4,819
1,600
1956
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida Ft. Lauderdale
Fort Lauderdale
FL
—
1,758
14,080
—
1,758
14,080
15,838
13,624
2,214
1969
1989
30 years
Kindred Hospital - North Florida
Green Cove Springs
FL
—
145
4,613
—
145
4,613
4,758
4,388
370
1956
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Hollywood
Hollywood
FL
—
605
5,229
—
605
5,229
5,834
5,234
600
1937
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Bay Area St. Petersburg
St. Petersburg
FL
—
1,401
16,706
—
1,401
16,706
18,107
14,108
3,999
1968
1997
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Central Tampa
Tampa
FL
—
2,732
7,676
—
2,732
7,676
10,408
4,939
5,469
1970
1993
40 years
145
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (North Campus)
Chicago
IL
—
1,583
19,980
—
1,583
19,980
21,563
19,156
2,407
1949
1995
25 years
Kindred - Chicago - Lakeshore
Chicago
IL
—
1,513
9,525
—
1,513
9,525
11,038
9,423
1,615
1995
1976
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (Northlake Campus)
Northlake
IL
—
850
6,498
—
850
6,498
7,348
5,819
1,529
1960
1991
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Sycamore
Sycamore
IL
—
77
8,549
—
77
8,549
8,626
8,099
527
1949
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Indianapolis
Indianapolis
IN
—
985
3,801
—
985
3,801
4,786
3,355
1,431
1955
1993
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Louisville
Louisville
KY
—
3,041
12,279
—
3,041
12,279
15,320
12,131
3,189
1964
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - New Orleans
New Orleans
LA
—
648
4,971
—
648
4,971
5,619
4,465
1,154
1968
1978
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Boston
Brighton
MA
—
1,551
9,796
—
1,551
9,796
11,347
9,129
2,218
1930
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - Boston North Shore
Peabody
MA
—
543
7,568
—
543
7,568
8,111
5,553
2,558
1974
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Kansas City
Kansas City
MO
—
277
2,914
—
277
2,914
3,191
2,639
552
1958
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - St. Louis
St. Louis
MO
—
1,126
2,087
—
1,126
2,087
3,213
1,873
1,340
1984
1991
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Las Vegas (Sahara)
Las Vegas
NV
—
1,110
2,177
—
1,110
2,177
3,287
1,349
1,938
1980
1994
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Albuquerque
Albuquerque
NM
—
11
4,253
—
11
4,253
4,264
2,796
1,468
1985
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Greensboro
Greensboro
NC
—
1,010
7,586
—
1,010
7,586
8,596
7,603
993
1964
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Oklahoma City
Oklahoma City
OK
—
293
5,607
—
293
5,607
5,900
4,543
1,357
1958
1993
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Pittsburgh
Oakdale
PA
—
662
12,854
—
662
12,854
13,516
9,854
3,662
1972
1996
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Philadelphia
Philadelphia
PA
—
135
5,223
—
135
5,223
5,358
3,220
2,138
1960
1995
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Chattanooga
Chattanooga
TN
—
756
4,415
—
756
4,415
5,171
4,043
1,128
1975
1993
22 years
Kindred Hospital - Tarrant County (Fort Worth Southwest)
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,342
7,458
—
2,342
7,458
9,800
7,493
2,307
1987
1986
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Fort Worth
Fort Worth
TX
—
648
10,608
—
648
10,608
11,256
8,734
2,522
1960
1994
34 years
Kindred Hospital (Houston Northwest)
Houston
TX
—
1,699
6,788
—
1,699
6,788
8,487
5,465
3,022
1986
1985
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Houston
Houston
TX
—
33
7,062
—
33
7,062
7,095
6,606
489
1972
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Mansfield
Mansfield
TX
—
267
2,462
—
267
2,462
2,729
1,903
826
1983
1990
40 years
Kindred Hospital - San Antonio
San Antonio
TX
—
249
11,413
—
249
11,413
11,662
8,816
2,846
1981
1993
30 years
Southern Arizona Rehab
Tucson
AZ
—
770
25,589
—
770
25,589
26,359
3,437
22,922
1992
2011
35 years
146
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
Tustin
CA
—
2,810
25,248
—
2,810
25,248
28,058
3,456
24,602
1991
2011
35 years
Lovelace Rehabilitation Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
401
17,186
—
401
17,186
17,587
204
17,383
1989
2015
36 years
University Hospitals Rehabilitation Hospital
Beachwood
OH
—
1,800
16,444
—
1,800
16,444
18,244
1,297
16,947
2013
2013
35 years
Reliant Rehabilitation - Dallas TX
Dallas
TX
—
2,318
38,702
—
2,318
38,702
41,020
1,129
39,891
2009
2015
35 years
Baylor Institute for Rehabilition - Ft. Worth TX
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,071
16,018
—
2,071
16,018
18,089
507
17,582
2008
2015
35 years
Reliant Rehabilitation - Houston TX
Houston
TX
—
1,838
34,832
—
1,838
34,832
36,670
1,065
35,605
2012
2015
35 years
Select Rehabilitation - San Antonio TX
San Antonio
TX
—
1,859
18,301
—
1,859
18,301
20,160
568
19,592
2010
2015
35 years
TOTAL FOR SPECIALTY HOSPITALS
—
52,039
465,280
—
52,039
465,280
517,319
254,248
263,071
GENERAL ACUTE CARE HOSPITALS
Lovelace Medical Center Downtown
Albuquerque
NM
—
9,840
156,535
—
9,840
156,535
166,375
2,060
164,315
1968
2015
33.5 years
Lovelace Westside Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
10,107
18,501
—
10,107
18,501
28,608
537
28,071
1984
2015
20.5 years
Lovelace Women's Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
7,236
183,866
—
7,236
183,866
191,102
1,707
189,395
1983
2015
47 years
Roswell Regional Hospital
Roswell
NM
—
2,560
41,164
—
2,560
41,164
43,724
400
43,324
2007
2015
47 years
Hillcrest Hospital Claremore
Claremore
OK
—
3,623
34,359
—
3,623
34,359
37,982
407
37,575
1955
2015
40 years
Bailey Medical Center
Owasso
OK
—
4,964
8,969
—
4,964
8,969
13,933
157
13,776
2006
2015
32.5 years
Hillcrest Medical Center
Tulsa
OK
—
28,319
215,199
—
28,319
215,199
243,518
3,315
240,203
1928
2015
34 years
Hillcrest Hospital South
Tulsa
OK
—
17,026
100,892
—
17,026
100,892
117,918
1,134
116,784
1999
2015
40 years
Baptist St. Anthony's Hospital
Amarillo
TX
—
13,779
358,029
—
13,779
358,029
371,808
3,545
368,263
1967
2015
44.5 years
Spire Hull and East Riding Hospital
Anlaby
Hull
—
3,194
81,613
(4,563
)
3,022
77,222
80,244
2,761
77,483
2010
2014
50 years
Spire Fylde Coast Hospital
Blackpool
Lancashire
—
2,446
28,896
(1,687
)
2,314
27,341
29,655
992
28,663
1980
2014
50 years
Spire Clare Park Hospital
Farnham
Surrey
—
6,263
26,119
(1,743
)
5,926
24,713
30,639
932
29,707
2009
2014
50 years
TOTAL FOR GENERAL ACUTE CARE HOSPITALS
—
109,357
1,254,142
(7,993
)
108,716
1,246,790
1,355,506
17,947
1,337,559
TOTAL FOR HOSPITALS
—
161,396
1,719,422
(7,993
)
160,755
1,712,070
1,872,825
272,195
1,600,630
BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Sterling House of Chandler
Chandler
AZ
—
2,000
6,538
—
2,000
6,538
8,538
1,008
7,530
1998
2011
35 years
The Springs of East Mesa
Mesa
AZ
—
2,747
24,918
—
2,747
24,918
27,665
9,532
18,133
1986
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Mesa
Mesa
AZ
—
655
6,998
—
655
6,998
7,653
2,653
5,000
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Oro Valley
Oro Valley
AZ
—
666
6,169
—
666
6,169
6,835
2,339
4,496
1998
2005
35 years
147
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sterling House of Peoria
Peoria
AZ
—
598
4,872
—
598
4,872
5,470
1,847
3,623
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,542
3,135
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House on East Speedway
Tucson
AZ
—
506
4,745
—
506
4,745
5,251
1,799
3,452
1998
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Fairwood Manor
Anaheim
CA
—
2,464
7,908
—
2,464
7,908
10,372
2,717
7,655
1977
2005
35 years
Woodside Terrace
Redwood City
CA
—
7,669
66,691
—
7,669
66,691
74,360
25,743
48,617
1988
2005
35 years
The Atrium
San Jose
CA
—
6,240
66,329
12,838
6,240
79,167
85,407
25,003
60,404
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Place
San Marcos
CA
—
4,288
36,204
—
4,288
36,204
40,492
14,066
26,426
1987
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Heritage Place
Tracy
CA
—
1,110
13,296
—
1,110
13,296
14,406
4,234
10,172
1986
2005
35 years
Ridge Point Assisted Living Inn
Boulder
CO
—
1,290
20,683
—
1,290
20,683
21,973
2,959
19,014
1985
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs
CO
—
715
9,279
—
715
9,279
9,994
3,518
6,476
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Pueblo
Pueblo
CO
4,938
840
9,403
—
840
9,403
10,243
3,565
6,678
1997
2005
35 years
The Gables at Farmington
Farmington
CT
—
3,995
36,310
—
3,995
36,310
40,305
13,885
26,420
1984
2005
35 years
Emeritus at South Windsor
South Windsor
CT
—
2,187
12,682
—
2,187
12,682
14,869
4,293
10,576
1999
2004
35 years
Chatfield
West Hartford
CT
—
2,493
22,833
10,457
2,493
33,290
35,783
8,718
27,065
1989
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Salina II
Bonita Springs
FL
8,895
1,540
10,783
—
1,540
10,783
12,323
4,031
8,292
1989
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach
FL
13,632
2,317
16,218
—
2,317
16,218
18,535
5,891
12,644
1999
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Deer Creek
Deerfield Beach
FL
—
1,399
9,791
—
1,399
9,791
11,190
3,889
7,301
1999
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,510
7,862
—
1,510
7,862
9,372
1,119
8,253
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Merrimac
Jacksonville
FL
—
860
16,745
—
860
16,745
17,605
2,283
15,322
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Jacksonville
Jacksonville
FL
—
1,300
9,659
—
1,300
9,659
10,959
1,355
9,604
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Jensen Beach
Jensen Beach
FL
12,232
1,831
12,820
—
1,831
12,820
14,651
4,777
9,874
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Ormond Beach
Ormond Beach
FL
—
1,660
9,738
—
1,660
9,738
11,398
1,377
10,021
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Palm Coast
Palm Coast
FL
—
470
9,187
—
470
9,187
9,657
1,311
8,346
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
633
6,087
—
633
6,087
6,720
2,308
4,412
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Englewood (FL)
Rotonda West
FL
—
1,740
4,331
—
1,740
4,331
6,071
745
5,326
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Tallahassee
Tallahassee
FL
4,385
667
6,168
—
667
6,168
6,835
2,339
4,496
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Tavares
Tavares
FL
—
280
15,980
—
280
15,980
16,260
2,189
14,071
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of West Melbourne
West Melbourne
FL
6,249
586
5,481
—
586
5,481
6,067
2,078
3,989
2000
2005
35 years
The Classic at West Palm Beach
West Palm Beach
FL
25,178
3,758
33,072
—
3,758
33,072
36,830
12,734
24,096
1990
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Winter Haven
Winter Haven
FL
—
232
3,006
—
232
3,006
3,238
1,140
2,098
1997
2005
35 years
148
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sterling House of Winter Haven
Winter Haven
FL
—
438
5,549
—
438
5,549
5,987
2,104
3,883
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Twin Falls
Twin Falls
ID
—
703
6,153
—
703
6,153
6,856
2,333
4,523
1997
2005
35 years
The Hallmark
Chicago
IL
—
11,057
107,517
3,266
11,057
110,783
121,840
41,513
80,327
1990
2005
35 years
The Kenwood of Lake View
Chicago
IL
—
3,072
26,668
—
3,072
26,668
29,740
10,298
19,442
1950
2005
35 years
The Heritage
Des Plaines
IL
32,000
6,871
60,165
—
6,871
60,165
67,036
23,190
43,846
1993
2005
35 years
Devonshire of Hoffman Estates
Hoffman Estates
IL
—
3,886
44,130
—
3,886
44,130
48,016
16,171
31,845
1987
2005
35 years
The Devonshire
Lisle
IL
33,000
7,953
70,400
—
7,953
70,400
78,353
27,072
51,281
1990
2005
35 years
Seasons at Glenview
Northbrook
IL
—
1,988
39,762
—
1,988
39,762
41,750
13,784
27,966
1999
2004
35 years
Hawthorn Lakes
Vernon Hills
IL
—
4,439
35,044
—
4,439
35,044
39,483
13,825
25,658
1987
2005
35 years
The Willows
Vernon Hills
IL
—
1,147
10,041
—
1,147
10,041
11,188
3,870
7,318
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Evansville
Evansville
IN
3,518
357
3,765
—
357
3,765
4,122
1,427
2,695
1998
2005
35 years
Berkshire of Castleton
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,280
11,515
—
1,280
11,515
12,795
4,413
8,382
1986
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Marion
Marion
IN
—
207
3,570
—
207
3,570
3,777
1,354
2,423
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Portage
Portage
IN
—
128
3,649
—
128
3,649
3,777
1,384
2,393
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Richmond
Richmond
IN
—
495
4,124
—
495
4,124
4,619
1,564
3,055
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Derby
Derby
KS
—
440
4,422
—
440
4,422
4,862
645
4,217
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Leawood
Leawood
KS
3,582
117
5,127
—
117
5,127
5,244
1,944
3,300
2000
2005
35 years
149
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sterling House of Salina II
Salina
KS
—
300
5,657
—
300
5,657
5,957
830
5,127
1996
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Topeka
Topeka
KS
4,797
370
6,825
—
370
6,825
7,195
2,588
4,607
2000
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Wellington
Wellington
KS
—
310
2,434
—
310
2,434
2,744
389
2,355
1994
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Farm Pond
Framingham
MA
—
5,819
33,361
2,430
5,819
35,791
41,610
10,986
30,624
1999
2004
35 years
Emeritus at Cape Cod (WhiteHall)
Hyannis
MA
—
1,277
9,063
—
1,277
9,063
10,340
2,850
7,490
1999
2005
35 years
River Bay Club
Quincy
MA
—
6,101
57,862
—
6,101
57,862
63,963
21,934
42,029
1986
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Davison
Davison
MI
—
160
3,189
2,543
160
5,732
5,892
1,137
4,755
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Delta Charter
Delta Township
MI
—
730
11,471
—
730
11,471
12,201
1,602
10,599
1998
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Delta Charter
Delta Township
MI
—
820
3,313
—
820
3,313
4,133
649
3,484
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Farmington Hills I
Farmington Hills
MI
—
580
10,497
—
580
10,497
11,077
1,650
9,427
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Farmington Hills II
Farmington Hills
MI
—
700
10,246
—
700
10,246
10,946
1,672
9,274
1994
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Meridian Lansing II
Haslett
MI
—
1,340
6,134
—
1,340
6,134
7,474
973
6,501
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Grand Blanc I
Holly
MI
—
450
12,373
—
450
12,373
12,823
1,736
11,087
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Grand Blanc II
Holly
MI
—
620
14,627
—
620
14,627
15,247
2,080
13,167
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Northville
Northville
MI
7,055
407
6,068
—
407
6,068
6,475
2,301
4,174
1996
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Troy I
Troy
MI
—
630
17,178
—
630
17,178
17,808
2,376
15,432
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Troy II
Troy
MI
—
950
12,503
—
950
12,503
13,453
1,865
11,588
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Utica
Utica
MI
—
1,142
11,808
—
1,142
11,808
12,950
4,477
8,473
1996
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Utica
Utica
MI
—
700
8,657
—
700
8,657
9,357
1,290
8,067
1995
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Blaine
Blaine
MN
—
150
1,675
—
150
1,675
1,825
635
1,190
1997
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie
MN
—
301
6,228
—
301
6,228
6,529
2,361
4,168
1998
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Faribault
Faribault
MN
—
530
1,085
—
530
1,085
1,615
201
1,414
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Inver Grove Heights
Inver Grove Heights
MN
2,791
253
2,655
—
253
2,655
2,908
1,007
1,901
1997
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
490
410
—
490
410
900
145
755
1996
2011
35 years
Edina Park Plaza
Minneapolis
MN
15,040
3,621
33,141
22,412
3,621
55,553
59,174
12,655
46,519
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of North Oaks
North Oaks
MN
—
1,057
8,296
—
1,057
8,296
9,353
3,145
6,208
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Plymouth
Plymouth
MN
—
679
8,675
—
679
8,675
9,354
3,289
6,065
1998
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Sauk Rapids
Sauk Rapids
MN
—
480
3,178
—
480
3,178
3,658
474
3,184
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Wilmar
Wilmar
MN
—
470
4,833
—
470
4,833
5,303
682
4,621
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Winona
Winona
MN
—
800
1,390
—
800
1,390
2,190
402
1,788
1997
2011
35 years
The Solana West County
Ballwin
MO
—
3,100
35,074
16
3,100
35,090
38,190
1,601
36,589
2012
2014
35 years
Clare Bridge of Cary
Cary
NC
—
724
6,466
—
724
6,466
7,190
2,451
4,739
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Hickory
Hickory
NC
—
330
10,981
—
330
10,981
11,311
1,537
9,774
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Winston-Salem
Winston-Salem
NC
—
368
3,497
—
368
3,497
3,865
1,326
2,539
1997
2005
35 years
150
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Brendenwood
Voorhees Township
NJ
17,538
3,158
29,909
—
3,158
29,909
33,067
11,340
21,727
1987
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Westampton
Westampton
NJ
—
881
4,741
—
881
4,741
5,622
1,798
3,824
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Deptford
Woodbury
NJ
—
1,190
5,482
—
1,190
5,482
6,672
855
5,817
1998
2011
35 years
Ponce de Leon
Santa Fe
NM
—
—
28,178
—
—
28,178
28,178
10,424
17,754
1986
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Kenmore
Buffalo
NY
13,154
1,487
15,170
—
1,487
15,170
16,657
5,751
10,906
1995
2005
35 years
Villas of Sherman Brook
Clinton
NY
—
947
7,528
—
947
7,528
8,475
2,854
5,621
1991
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Liberty (Manlius)
Manlius
NY
—
890
28,237
—
890
28,237
29,127
3,870
25,257
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Perinton
Pittsford
NY
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,541
3,136
1997
2005
35 years
The Gables at Brighton
Rochester
NY
—
1,131
9,498
—
1,131
9,498
10,629
3,695
6,934
1988
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
—
1,021
8,333
—
1,021
8,333
9,354
3,159
6,195
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
16,487
1,884
16,103
—
1,884
16,103
17,987
6,105
11,882
1996
2005
35 years
Villas of Summerfield
Syracuse
NY
—
1,132
11,434
—
1,132
11,434
12,566
4,335
8,231
1991
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Williamsville
Williamsville
NY
6,800
839
3,841
—
839
3,841
4,680
1,456
3,224
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Alliance
Alliance
OH
2,222
392
6,283
—
392
6,283
6,675
2,382
4,293
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Austintown
Austintown
OH
—
151
3,087
—
151
3,087
3,238
1,170
2,068
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Barberton
Barberton
OH
—
440
10,884
—
440
10,884
11,324
1,525
9,799
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Beaver Creek
Beavercreek
OH
—
587
5,381
—
587
5,381
5,968
2,040
3,928
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Englewood (OH)
Clayton
OH
—
630
6,477
—
630
6,477
7,107
958
6,149
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Westerville
Columbus
OH
1,829
267
3,600
—
267
3,600
3,867
1,365
2,502
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Greenville
Greenville
OH
—
490
4,144
—
490
4,144
4,634
722
3,912
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Lancaster
Lancaster
OH
—
460
4,662
—
460
4,662
5,122
725
4,397
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Marion
Marion
OH
—
620
3,306
—
620
3,306
3,926
555
3,371
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Salem
Salem
OH
—
634
4,659
—
634
4,659
5,293
1,766
3,527
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Springdale
Springdale
OH
—
1,140
9,134
—
1,140
9,134
10,274
1,300
8,974
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Bartlesville
Bartlesville
OK
—
250
10,529
—
250
10,529
10,779
1,451
9,328
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Bethany
Bethany
OK
—
390
1,499
—
390
1,499
1,889
274
1,615
1994
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Broken Arrow
Broken Arrow
OK
—
940
6,312
6,410
1,873
11,789
13,662
1,485
12,177
1996
2011
35 years
Forest Grove Residential Community
Forest Grove
OR
—
2,320
9,633
—
2,320
9,633
11,953
1,512
10,441
1994
2011
35 years
The Heritage at Mt. Hood
Gresham
OR
—
2,410
9,093
—
2,410
9,093
11,503
1,427
10,076
1988
2011
35 years
McMinnville Residential Estates
McMinnville
OR
1,552
1,230
7,561
—
1,230
7,561
8,791
1,317
7,474
1989
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Denton
Denton
TX
—
1,750
6,712
—
1,750
6,712
8,462
968
7,494
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Ennis
Ennis
TX
—
460
3,284
—
460
3,284
3,744
520
3,224
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Kerrville
Kerrville
TX
—
460
8,548
—
460
8,548
9,008
1,200
7,808
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Lancaster
Lancaster
TX
—
410
1,478
—
410
1,478
1,888
295
1,593
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Paris
Paris
TX
—
360
2,411
—
360
2,411
2,771
415
2,356
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of San Antonio
San Antonio
TX
—
1,400
10,051
—
1,400
10,051
11,451
1,433
10,018
1997
2011
35 years
151
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sterling House of Temple
Temple
TX
—
330
5,081
—
330
5,081
5,411
770
4,641
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Ridgewood Gardens
Salem
VA
—
1,900
16,219
—
1,900
16,219
18,119
5,743
12,376
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Lynwood
Lynnwood
WA
—
1,219
9,573
—
1,219
9,573
10,792
3,630
7,162
1999
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Puyallup
Puyallup
WA
9,587
1,055
8,298
—
1,055
8,298
9,353
3,146
6,207
1998
2005
35 years
Columbia Edgewater
Richland
WA
—
960
23,270
—
960
23,270
24,230
3,360
20,870
1990
2011
35 years
Park Place
Spokane
WA
—
1,622
12,895
—
1,622
12,895
14,517
5,079
9,438
1915
2005
35 years
Crossings at Allenmore
Tacoma
WA
—
620
16,186
—
620
16,186
16,806
2,257
14,549
1997
2011
35 years
Union Park at Allenmore
Tacoma
WA
—
1,710
3,326
—
1,710
3,326
5,036
754
4,282
1988
2011
35 years
Crossings at Yakima
Yakima
WA
—
860
15,276
—
860
15,276
16,136
2,197
13,939
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Fond du Lac
Fond du Lac
WI
—
196
1,603
—
196
1,603
1,799
608
1,191
2000
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
551
5,431
2,772
551
8,203
8,754
2,643
6,111
2000
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
630
1,694
—
630
1,694
2,324
283
2,041
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of La Crosse
La Crosse
WI
—
621
4,056
1,126
621
5,182
5,803
1,775
4,028
2004
2005
35 years
Sterling House of La Crosse
La Crosse
WI
—
644
5,831
2,637
644
8,468
9,112
2,768
6,344
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Middleton
Middleton
WI
—
360
5,041
—
360
5,041
5,401
714
4,687
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Neenah
Neenah
WI
—
340
1,030
—
340
1,030
1,370
194
1,176
1996
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Onalaska
Onalaska
WI
—
250
4,949
—
250
4,949
5,199
697
4,502
1995
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Oshkosh
Oshkosh
WI
—
160
1,904
—
160
1,904
2,064
310
1,754
1996
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Sun Prairie
Sun Prairie
WI
—
350
1,131
—
350
1,131
1,481
207
1,274
1994
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
246,461
190,934
1,803,345
66,907
191,867
1,869,319
2,061,186
562,297
1,498,889
SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Sunrise of Chandler
Chandler
AZ
—
4,344
14,455
448
4,439
14,808
19,247
1,980
17,267
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Scottsdale
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,229
27,575
511
2,255
28,060
30,315
7,375
22,940
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of River Road
Tucson
AZ
—
2,971
12,399
102
2,971
12,501
15,472
1,545
13,927
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Lynn Valley
Vancouver
BC
—
11,759
37,424
(13,159
)
8,445
27,579
36,024
7,210
28,814
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Vancouver
Vancouver
BC
—
6,649
31,937
313
6,661
32,238
38,899
8,746
30,153
2005
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Victoria
Victoria
BC
—
8,332
29,970
(10,044
)
5,999
22,259
28,258
5,924
22,334
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise at La Costa
Carlsbad
CA
—
4,890
20,590
1,276
4,960
21,796
26,756
6,293
20,463
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Carmichael
Carmichael
CA
—
1,269
14,598
247
1,269
14,845
16,114
1,903
14,211
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Fair Oaks
Fair Oaks
CA
—
1,456
23,679
1,680
2,271
24,544
26,815
6,792
20,023
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,802
24,560
1,234
3,827
25,769
29,596
7,162
22,434
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Canyon Crest
Riverside
CA
—
5,486
19,658
1,531
5,530
21,145
26,675
5,801
20,874
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rocklin
Rocklin
CA
—
1,378
23,565
731
1,411
24,263
25,674
6,442
19,232
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of San Mateo
San Mateo
CA
—
2,682
35,335
1,320
2,695
36,642
39,337
9,672
29,665
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
2,933
34,361
821
2,948
35,167
38,115
9,330
28,785
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Sterling Canyon
Valencia
CA
—
3,868
29,293
4,146
3,995
33,312
37,307
9,469
27,838
1998
2007
35 years
152
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Westlake Village
Westlake Village
CA
—
4,935
30,722
903
5,006
31,554
36,560
8,363
28,197
2004
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda
CA
—
1,689
25,240
1,219
1,755
26,393
28,148
6,952
21,196
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Cherry Creek
Denver
CO
—
1,621
28,370
1,060
1,703
29,348
31,051
7,904
23,147
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Pinehurst
Denver
CO
—
1,417
30,885
1,727
1,596
32,433
34,029
9,070
24,959
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Orchard
Littleton
CO
—
1,813
22,183
1,210
1,846
23,360
25,206
6,569
18,637
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westminster
Westminster
CO
—
2,649
16,243
1,387
2,686
17,593
20,279
4,846
15,433
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Stamford
Stamford
CT
—
4,612
28,533
1,518
4,648
30,015
34,663
8,438
26,225
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Jacksonville
Jacksonville
FL
—
2,390
17,671
119
2,405
17,775
20,180
2,314
17,866
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Ivey Ridge
Alpharetta
GA
—
1,507
18,516
1,108
1,513
19,618
21,131
5,467
15,664
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Huntcliff I
Atlanta
GA
—
4,232
66,161
15,067
4,185
81,275
85,460
21,207
64,253
1987
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Huntcliff II
Atlanta
GA
—
2,154
17,137
1,650
2,160
18,781
20,941
5,352
15,589
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at East Cobb
Marietta
GA
—
1,797
23,420
1,346
1,799
24,764
26,563
6,783
19,780
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Barrington
Barrington
IL
—
859
15,085
378
867
15,455
16,322
2,008
14,314
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomingdale
Bloomingdale
IL
—
1,287
38,625
1,523
1,382
40,053
41,435
10,637
30,798
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Buffalo Grove
Buffalo Grove
IL
—
2,154
28,021
1,040
2,272
28,943
31,215
7,933
23,282
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lincoln Park
Chicago
IL
—
3,485
26,687
829
3,504
27,497
31,001
7,111
23,890
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Naperville
Naperville
IL
—
1,946
28,538
2,435
1,995
30,924
32,919
8,374
24,545
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Palos Park
Palos Park
IL
—
2,363
42,205
927
2,369
43,126
45,495
11,475
34,020
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Park Ridge
Park Ridge
IL
—
5,533
39,557
1,906
5,630
41,366
46,996
10,910
36,086
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Willowbrook
Willowbrook
IL
—
1,454
60,738
2,142
2,047
62,287
64,334
14,882
49,452
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Old Meridian
Carmel
IN
—
8,550
31,746
217
8,550
31,963
40,513
4,127
36,386
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Leawood
Leawood
KS
—
651
16,401
438
768
16,722
17,490
1,999
15,491
2006
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Overland Park
Overland Park
KS
—
650
11,015
350
660
11,355
12,015
1,506
10,509
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge
LA
—
1,212
23,547
1,267
1,321
24,705
26,026
6,625
19,401
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Arlington
Arlington
MA
—
86
34,393
846
107
35,218
35,325
9,631
25,694
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Norwood
Norwood
MA
—
2,230
30,968
1,642
2,306
32,534
34,840
8,683
26,157
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Columbia
Columbia
MD
—
1,780
23,083
1,853
1,855
24,861
26,716
6,804
19,912
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rockville
Rockville
MD
—
1,039
39,216
1,634
1,066
40,823
41,889
10,443
31,446
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomfield
Bloomfield Hills
MI
—
3,736
27,657
1,613
3,817
29,189
33,006
7,745
25,261
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cascade
Grand Rapids
MI
—
1,273
21,782
262
1,284
22,033
23,317
2,739
20,578
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Northville
Plymouth
MI
—
1,445
26,090
985
1,525
26,995
28,520
7,472
21,048
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rochester
Rochester
MI
—
2,774
38,666
1,105
2,841
39,704
42,545
10,510
32,035
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Troy
Troy
MI
—
1,758
23,727
645
1,860
24,270
26,130
6,686
19,444
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Edina
Edina
MN
—
3,181
24,224
2,538
3,270
26,673
29,943
7,286
22,657
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise on Providence
Charlotte
NC
—
1,976
19,472
2,028
1,988
21,488
23,476
5,714
17,762
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at North Hills
Raleigh
NC
—
749
37,091
3,504
762
40,582
41,344
10,864
30,480
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of East Brunswick
East Brunswick
NJ
—
2,784
26,173
1,760
3,047
27,670
30,717
7,885
22,832
1999
2007
35 years
153
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Jackson
Jackson
NJ
—
4,009
15,029
304
4,014
15,328
19,342
2,074
17,268
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Morris Plains
Morris Plains
NJ
18,165
1,492
32,052
1,709
1,517
33,736
35,253
8,956
26,297
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Old Tappan
Old Tappan
NJ
16,869
2,985
36,795
1,639
3,042
38,377
41,419
10,195
31,224
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wall
Wall Township
NJ
—
1,053
19,101
1,011
1,063
20,102
21,165
5,533
15,632
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wayne
Wayne
NJ
13,400
1,288
24,990
1,597
1,324
26,551
27,875
7,190
20,685
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westfield
Westfield
NJ
17,756
5,057
23,803
1,768
5,117
25,511
30,628
7,018
23,610
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Woodcliff Lake
Woodcliff Lake
NJ
—
3,493
30,801
1,258
3,537
32,015
35,552
8,844
26,708
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of North Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
4,622
38,087
1,672
4,700
39,681
44,381
11,128
33,253
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Fleetwood
Mount Vernon
NY
—
4,381
28,434
1,978
4,400
30,393
34,793
8,353
26,440
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of New City
New City
NY
—
1,906
27,323
1,520
1,950
28,799
30,749
7,817
22,932
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Smithtown
Smithtown
NY
—
2,853
25,621
2,001
3,038
27,437
30,475
8,036
22,439
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Staten Island
Staten Island
NY
—
7,237
23,910
151
7,288
24,010
31,298
8,458
22,840
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Parma
Cleveland
OH
—
695
16,641
1,085
890
17,531
18,421
4,791
13,630
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cuyahoga Falls
Cuyahoga Falls
OH
—
626
10,239
1,386
724
11,527
12,251
3,176
9,075
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Aurora
Aurora
ON
—
1,570
36,113
(9,936
)
1,133
26,614
27,747
7,065
20,682
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Burlington
Burlington
ON
—
1,173
24,448
371
1,190
24,802
25,992
6,465
19,527
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Unionville
Markham
ON
—
2,322
41,140
(11,229
)
1,722
30,511
32,233
8,007
24,226
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mississauga
Mississauga
ON
—
3,554
33,631
(9,614
)
2,586
24,985
27,571
6,521
21,050
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Erin Mills
Mississauga
ON
—
1,957
27,020
(7,618
)
1,407
19,952
21,359
5,555
15,804
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Oakville
Oakville
ON
—
2,753
37,489
547
2,755
38,034
40,789
9,817
30,972
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond Hill
Richmond Hill
ON
—
2,155
41,254
(11,479
)
1,553
30,377
31,930
7,834
24,096
2002
2007
35 years
Thorne Mill of Steeles
Vaughan
ON
—
2,563
57,513
(13,988
)
1,063
45,025
46,088
10,866
35,222
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Windsor
Windsor
ON
—
1,813
20,882
442
1,832
21,305
23,137
5,633
17,504
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Abington
Abington
PA
22,819
1,838
53,660
3,883
1,980
57,401
59,381
14,930
44,451
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Blue Bell
Blue Bell
PA
—
1,765
23,920
2,149
1,827
26,007
27,834
7,270
20,564
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Exton
Exton
PA
—
1,123
17,765
1,500
1,187
19,201
20,388
5,312
15,076
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Haverford
Haverford
PA
7,159
941
25,872
1,738
962
27,589
28,551
7,340
21,211
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Granite Run
Media
PA
11,019
1,272
31,781
2,098
1,372
33,779
35,151
8,893
26,258
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lower Makefield
Morrisville
PA
—
3,165
21,337
359
3,165
21,696
24,861
2,796
22,065
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Westtown
West Chester
PA
—
1,547
22,996
1,383
1,570
24,356
25,926
7,073
18,853
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Hillcrest
Dallas
TX
—
2,616
27,680
562
2,626
28,232
30,858
7,639
23,219
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Fort Worth
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,024
18,587
539
2,082
19,068
21,150
2,454
18,696
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Frisco
Frisco
TX
—
2,523
14,547
189
2,535
14,724
17,259
1,694
15,565
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Cinco Ranch
Katy
TX
—
2,512
21,600
452
2,550
22,014
24,564
2,782
21,782
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Holladay
Holladay
UT
—
2,542
44,771
435
2,577
45,171
47,748
5,614
42,134
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Sandy
Sandy
UT
—
2,576
22,987
155
2,618
23,100
25,718
6,359
19,359
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Alexandria
Alexandria
VA
—
88
14,811
1,431
176
16,154
16,330
4,961
11,369
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond
Richmond
VA
—
1,120
17,446
1,136
1,149
18,553
19,702
5,307
14,395
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Bon Air
Richmond
VA
—
2,047
22,079
390
2,032
22,484
24,516
2,918
21,598
2008
2012
35 years
154
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Springfield
Springfield
VA
8,198
4,440
18,834
2,164
4,466
20,972
25,438
5,723
19,715
1997
2007
35 years
TOTAL FOR SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
115,385
245,515
2,532,176
30,476
240,790
2,567,377
2,808,167
647,355
2,160,812
ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Arbour Lake
Calgary
AB
—
2,512
39,188
(6,592
)
2,116
32,992
35,108
1,559
33,549
2003
2014
35 years
Canyon Meadows
Calgary
AB
—
1,617
30,803
(4,944
)
1,358
26,118
27,476
1,270
26,206
1995
2014
35 years
Churchill Manor
Edmonton
AB
—
2,865
30,482
(4,969
)
2,406
25,972
28,378
1,274
27,104
1999
2014
35 years
View at Lethbridge
Lethbridge
AB
—
2,503
24,770
(4,211
)
2,102
20,960
23,062
1,105
21,957
2007
2014
35 years
Victoria Park
Red Deer
AB
8,194
1,188
22,554
(3,325
)
998
19,419
20,417
1,018
19,399
1999
2014
35 years
Ironwood Estates
St. Albert
AB
—
3,639
22,519
(3,791
)
3,056
19,311
22,367
1,011
21,356
1998
2014
35 years
Atria Regency
Mobile
AL
—
950
11,897
1,036
953
12,930
13,883
2,584
11,299
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Chandler Villas
Chandler
AZ
—
3,650
8,450
1,121
3,715
9,506
13,221
2,602
10,619
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Sierra Pointe
Scottsdale
AZ
—
10,930
65,372
938
10,952
66,288
77,240
3,188
74,052
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Campana Del Rio
Tucson
AZ
—
5,861
37,284
1,408
5,896
38,657
44,553
7,302
37,251
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Valley Manor
Tucson
AZ
—
1,709
60
544
1,738
575
2,313
210
2,103
1963
2011
35 years
Atria Bell Court Gardens
Tucson
AZ
—
3,010
30,969
890
3,020
31,849
34,869
5,374
29,495
1964
2011
35 years
Longlake Chateau
Nanaimo
BC
8,564
1,874
22,910
(3,626
)
1,574
19,584
21,158
1,042
20,116
1990
2014
35 years
Prince George
Prince George
BC
8,431
2,066
22,761
(3,903
)
1,735
19,189
20,924
1,034
19,890
2005
2014
35 years
The Victorian
Victoria
BC
—
3,419
16,351
(2,957
)
2,871
13,942
16,813
782
16,031
1988
2014
35 years
Victorian at McKenzie
Victoria
BC
—
4,801
25,712
(4,688
)
4,031
21,794
25,825
1,124
24,701
2003
2014
35 years
Atria Burlingame
Burlingame
CA
7,152
2,494
12,373
998
2,523
13,342
15,865
2,455
13,410
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Las Posas
Camarillo
CA
—
4,500
28,436
689
4,508
29,117
33,625
4,834
28,791
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Carmichael Oaks
Carmichael
CA
18,684
2,118
49,694
1,264
2,134
50,942
53,076
4,617
48,459
1992
2013
35 years
Atria El Camino Gardens
Carmichael
CA
—
6,930
32,318
8,915
6,971
41,192
48,163
5,984
42,179
1984
2011
35 years
Atria Covina
Covina
CA
—
170
4,131
565
250
4,616
4,866
1,076
3,790
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Daly City
Daly City
CA
7,291
3,090
13,448
1,003
3,099
14,442
17,541
2,540
15,001
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Covell Gardens
Davis
CA
18,171
2,163
39,657
7,856
2,382
47,294
49,676
8,284
41,392
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Encinitas
Encinitas
CA
—
5,880
9,212
864
5,922
10,034
15,956
2,057
13,899
1984
2011
35 years
Atria Escondido
Escondido
CA
—
1,196
7,155
166
1,196
7,321
8,517
505
8,012
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Grass Valley
Grass Valley
CA
11,644
1,965
28,414
435
1,983
28,831
30,814
2,768
28,046
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Golden Creek
Irvine
CA
—
6,900
23,544
936
6,924
24,456
31,380
4,526
26,854
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbridge
Irvine
CA
—
—
5
1,372
91
1,286
1,377
305
1,072
1997
2012
35 years
Atria Lafayette
Lafayette
CA
19,618
5,679
56,922
386
5,692
57,295
62,987
4,946
58,041
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Del Sol
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,500
12,458
8,559
3,716
20,801
24,517
2,584
21,933
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Tamalpais Creek
Novato
CA
—
5,812
24,703
500
5,827
25,188
31,015
4,293
26,722
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Pacific Palisades
Pacific Palisades
CA
—
4,458
17,064
1,065
4,470
18,117
22,587
5,329
17,258
2001
2007
35 years
Atria Palm Desert
Palm Desert
CA
—
2,887
9,843
1,018
3,106
10,642
13,748
3,354
10,394
1988
2011
35 years
155
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Hacienda
Palm Desert
CA
—
6,680
85,900
2,231
6,826
87,985
94,811
13,532
81,279
1989
2011
35 years
Atria Paradise
Paradise
CA
4,983
2,265
28,262
715
2,309
28,933
31,242
2,646
28,596
1999
2013
35 years
Atria Del Rey
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
3,290
17,427
4,517
3,458
21,776
25,234
4,992
20,242
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Collwood
San Diego
CA
—
290
10,650
751
338
11,353
11,691
2,267
9,424
1976
2011
35 years
Atria Rancho Park
San Dimas
CA
—
4,066
14,306
1,069
4,576
14,865
19,441
3,258
16,183
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Chateau Gardens
San Jose
CA
—
39
487
554
39
1,041
1,080
616
464
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Glen
San Jose
CA
—
8,521
43,168
2,097
8,556
45,230
53,786
6,412
47,374
1976
2011
35 years
Atria Chateau San Juan
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
5,110
29,436
8,027
5,305
37,268
42,573
8,173
34,400
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Hillsdale
San Mateo
CA
—
5,240
15,956
1,384
5,251
17,329
22,580
2,996
19,584
1986
2011
35 years
Atria Bayside Landing
Stockton
CA
—
—
467
456
—
923
923
581
342
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
6,120
30,068
4,117
6,217
34,088
40,305
5,498
34,807
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Tarzana
Tarzana
CA
—
960
47,547
520
968
48,059
49,027
4,021
45,006
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Vintage Hills
Temecula
CA
—
4,674
44,341
1,160
4,784
45,391
50,175
4,391
45,784
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Grand Oaks
Thousand Oaks
CA
22,350
5,994
50,309
444
6,044
50,703
56,747
4,759
51,988
2002
2013
35 years
Atria Hillcrest
Thousand Oaks
CA
—
6,020
25,635
9,492
6,612
34,535
41,147
7,045
34,102
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Montego Heights
Walnut Creek
CA
—
6,910
15,797
14,523
7,535
29,695
37,230
4,591
32,639
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Valley View
Walnut Creek
CA
—
7,139
53,914
2,343
7,171
56,225
63,396
13,463
49,933
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Applewood
Lakewood
CO
—
3,656
48,657
331
3,675
48,969
52,644
4,765
47,879
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Inn at Lakewood
Lakewood
CO
—
6,281
50,095
1,127
6,311
51,192
57,503
7,852
49,651
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Vistas in Longmont
Longmont
CO
—
2,807
24,877
374
2,815
25,243
28,058
3,279
24,779
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Darien
Darien
CT
19,494
653
37,587
3,991
816
41,415
42,231
6,737
35,494
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Larson Place
Hamden
CT
—
1,850
16,098
1,106
1,873
17,181
19,054
3,259
15,795
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Greenridge Place
Rocky Hill
CT
—
2,170
32,553
1,412
2,388
33,747
36,135
5,430
30,705
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stamford
Stamford
CT
36,272
1,200
62,432
3,474
1,373
65,733
67,106
10,775
56,331
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Stratford
Stratford
CT
—
3,210
27,865
1,067
3,210
28,932
32,142
5,122
27,020
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Crossroads Place
Waterford
CT
—
2,401
36,495
7,290
2,552
43,634
46,186
6,721
39,465
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Hamilton Heights
West Hartford
CT
—
3,120
14,674
2,136
3,154
16,776
19,930
3,701
16,229
1904
2011
35 years
Atria Windsor Woods
Hudson
FL
—
1,610
32,432
1,407
1,661
33,788
35,449
6,145
29,304
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Baypoint Village
Hudson
FL
15,436
2,083
28,841
4,345
2,259
33,010
35,269
6,475
28,794
1986
2011
35 years
Atria San Pablo
Jacksonville
FL
5,596
1,620
14,920
678
1,642
15,576
17,218
2,614
14,604
1999
2011
35 years
Atria at St. Joseph's
Jupiter
FL
16,115
5,520
30,720
612
5,549
31,303
36,852
2,945
33,907
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Meridian
Lake Worth
FL
—
—
10
1,169
30
1,149
1,179
307
872
1986
2012
35 years
Atria Heritage at Lake Forest
Sanford
FL
—
3,589
32,586
2,618
3,844
34,949
38,793
5,553
33,240
2002
2011
35 years
Atria Evergreen Woods
Spring Hill
FL
—
2,370
28,371
2,859
2,518
31,082
33,600
6,251
27,349
1981
2011
35 years
Atria North Point
Alpharetta
GA
41,724
4,830
78,318
775
4,853
79,070
83,923
4,772
79,151
2007
2014
35 years
Atria Buckhead
Atlanta
GA
—
3,660
5,274
673
3,683
5,924
9,607
1,443
8,164
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Mableton
Austell
GA
—
1,911
18,879
227
1,942
19,075
21,017
1,879
19,138
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Johnson Ferry
Marietta
GA
—
990
6,453
363
995
6,811
7,806
1,327
6,479
1995
2011
35 years
156
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Tucker
Tucker
GA
—
1,103
20,679
275
1,115
20,942
22,057
2,030
20,027
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Glen Ellyn
Glen Ellyn
IL
—
2,455
34,064
1,849
2,486
35,882
38,368
9,799
28,569
2000
2007
35 years
Atria Newburgh
Newburgh
IN
—
1,150
22,880
499
1,150
23,379
24,529
3,787
20,742
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone East
Topeka
KS
—
1,150
20,544
756
1,171
21,279
22,450
3,748
18,702
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone West
Topeka
KS
—
1,230
28,379
1,826
1,230
30,205
31,435
5,555
25,880
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Highland Crossing
Covington
KY
—
1,677
14,393
1,203
1,689
15,584
17,273
3,262
14,011
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Summit Hills
Crestview Hills
KY
—
1,780
15,769
698
1,789
16,458
18,247
3,020
15,227
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Elizabethtown
Elizabethtown
KY
—
850
12,510
486
869
12,977
13,846
2,238
11,608
1996
2011
35 years
Atria St. Matthews
Louisville
KY
—
939
9,274
627
948
9,892
10,840
2,408
8,432
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stony Brook
Louisville
KY
—
1,860
17,561
582
1,888
18,115
20,003
3,238
16,765
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Springdale
Louisville
KY
—
1,410
16,702
743
1,410
17,445
18,855
3,139
15,716
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Marland Place
Andover
MA
—
1,831
34,592
18,612
1,984
53,051
55,035
7,581
47,454
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Longmeadow Place
Burlington
MA
—
5,310
58,021
1,093
5,383
59,041
64,424
8,948
55,476
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Fairhaven (Alden)
Fairhaven
MA
—
1,100
16,093
602
1,117
16,678
17,795
2,725
15,070
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbriar Place
Falmouth
MA
22,940
4,630
—
32,684
6,433
30,881
37,314
3,431
33,883
2013
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbriar
Falmouth
MA
—
1,970
43,693
16,799
1,974
60,488
62,462
6,640
55,822
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Draper Place
Hopedale
MA
—
1,140
17,794
1,173
1,154
18,953
20,107
3,155
16,952
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Merrimack Place
Newburyport
MA
—
2,774
40,645
1,089
2,809
41,699
44,508
6,305
38,203
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Marina Place
Quincy
MA
—
2,590
33,899
1,207
2,606
35,090
37,696
5,753
31,943
1999
2011
35 years
Riverheights Terrace
Brandon
MB
8,823
799
27,708
(4,396
)
671
23,440
24,111
1,191
22,920
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Meadow
Winnipeg
MB
—
3,047
17,821
(2,996
)
2,560
15,312
17,872
901
16,971
2000
2014
35 years
The Westhaven
Winnipeg
MB
—
871
23,162
(3,572
)
742
19,719
20,461
1,039
19,422
1988
2014
35 years
Atria Manresa
Annapolis
MD
—
4,193
19,000
1,438
4,465
20,166
24,631
3,453
21,178
1920
2011
35 years
Atria Salisbury
Salisbury
MD
—
1,940
24,500
401
1,949
24,892
26,841
3,918
22,923
1995
2011
35 years
Atria Kennebunk
Kennebunk
ME
—
1,090
23,496
709
1,104
24,191
25,295
4,067
21,228
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Ann Arbor
Ann Arbor
MI
—
1,703
15,857
1,720
1,710
17,570
19,280
4,995
14,285
2001
2007
35 years
Atria Kinghaven
Riverview
MI
13,545
1,440
26,260
1,255
1,495
27,460
28,955
4,901
24,054
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Shorehaven
Sterling Heights
MI
—
—
8
996
23
981
1,004
204
800
1989
2012
35 years
Ste. Anne’s Court
Fredericton
NB
—
1,221
29,626
(4,781
)
1,025
25,041
26,066
1,262
24,804
2002
2014
35 years
Chateau De Champlain
St. John
NB
8,287
796
24,577
(3,797
)
674
20,902
21,576
1,094
20,482
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Merrywood
Charlotte
NC
—
1,678
36,892
2,051
1,705
38,916
40,621
6,946
33,675
1991
2011
35 years
Atria Southpoint
Durham
NC
16,609
2,130
25,920
446
2,130
26,366
28,496
2,608
25,888
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Oakridge
Raleigh
NC
15,406
1,482
28,838
404
1,514
29,210
30,724
2,906
27,818
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Cranford
Cranford
NJ
26,052
8,260
61,411
3,011
8,344
64,338
72,682
10,747
61,935
1993
2011
35 years
Atria Tinton Falls
Tinton Falls
NJ
—
6,580
13,258
1,037
6,593
14,282
20,875
3,073
17,802
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Vista del Rio
Albuquerque
NM
—
—
36
1,008
57
987
1,044
227
817
1997
2012
35 years
Atria Sunlake
Las Vegas
NV
—
7
732
745
7
1,477
1,484
883
601
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sutton
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
863
894
39
1,718
1,757
1,100
657
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Seville
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
796
811
11
1,596
1,607
975
632
1999
2011
35 years
157
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Summit Ridge
Reno
NV
—
4
407
336
4
743
747
482
265
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Shaker
Albany
NY
—
1,520
29,667
797
1,626
30,358
31,984
5,018
26,966
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Crossgate
Albany
NY
—
1,080
20,599
816
1,080
21,415
22,495
3,642
18,853
1980
2011
35 years
Atria Woodlands
Ardsley
NY
46,448
7,660
65,581
1,657
7,682
67,216
74,898
10,727
64,171
2005
2011
35 years
Atria Bay Shore
Bay Shore
NY
15,275
4,440
31,983
1,256
4,448
33,231
37,679
5,477
32,202
1900
2011
35 years
Atria Briarcliff Manor
Briarcliff Manor
NY
—
6,560
33,885
1,632
6,613
35,464
42,077
6,012
36,065
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Riverdale
Bronx
NY
—
1,020
24,149
12,988
1,057
37,100
38,157
5,277
32,880
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Delmar Place
Delmar
NY
—
1,201
24,850
436
1,219
25,268
26,487
1,789
24,698
2004
2013
35 years
Atria East Northport
East Northport
NY
—
9,960
34,467
18,029
10,003
52,453
62,456
6,082
56,374
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Glen Cove
Glen Cove
NY
—
2,035
25,190
910
2,049
26,086
28,135
8,278
19,857
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Great Neck
Great Neck
NY
—
3,390
54,051
1,386
3,390
55,437
58,827
8,347
50,480
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cutter Mill
Great Neck
NY
34,301
2,750
47,919
1,668
2,756
49,581
52,337
7,710
44,627
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Huntington
Huntington Station
NY
—
8,190
1,169
1,609
8,232
2,736
10,968
1,375
9,593
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Hertlin House
Lake Ronkonkoma
NY
—
7,886
16,391
1,166
7,886
17,557
25,443
2,089
23,354
2002
2012
35 years
Atria Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
3,145
5,489
718
3,147
6,205
9,352
1,713
7,639
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Tanglewood
Lynbrook
NY
25,130
4,120
37,348
672
4,142
37,998
42,140
5,915
36,225
2005
2011
35 years
Atria 86th Street
New York
NY
—
80
73,685
4,713
167
78,311
78,478
12,777
65,701
1998
2011
35 years
Atria on the Hudson
Ossining
NY
—
8,123
63,089
2,622
8,157
65,677
73,834
11,237
62,597
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Penfield
Penfield
NY
—
620
22,036
626
628
22,654
23,282
3,822
19,460
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Plainview
Plainview
NY
13,099
2,480
16,060
929
2,630
16,839
19,469
3,089
16,380
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Rye Brook
Port Chester
NY
43,053
9,660
74,936
984
9,716
75,864
85,580
11,865
73,715
2004
2011
35 years
Atria Kew Gardens
Queens
NY
—
3,051
66,013
7,437
3,068
73,433
76,501
10,391
66,110
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Hills
Queens
NY
—
2,050
16,680
635
2,050
17,315
19,365
3,058
16,307
2001
2011
35 years
Atria Greece
Rochester
NY
—
410
14,967
848
636
15,589
16,225
2,733
13,492
1970
2011
35 years
Atria on Roslyn Harbor
Roslyn
NY
65,000
12,909
72,720
1,333
12,968
73,994
86,962
11,390
75,572
2006
2011
35 years
Atria Guilderland
Slingerlands
NY
—
1,170
22,414
339
1,171
22,752
23,923
3,723
20,200
1950
2011
35 years
Atria South Setauket
South Setauket
NY
—
8,450
14,534
1,145
8,786
15,343
24,129
3,897
20,232
1967
2011
35 years
Atria Northgate Park
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
—
540
23
517
540
177
363
1985
2012
35 years
The Court at Brooklin
Brooklin
ON
—
2,515
35,602
(5,917
)
2,112
30,088
32,200
1,448
30,752
2004
2014
35 years
Burlington Gardens
Burlington
ON
—
7,560
50,744
(9,122
)
6,349
42,833
49,182
1,980
47,202
2008
2014
35 years
The Court at Rushdale
Hamilton
ON
13,076
1,799
34,633
(5,334
)
1,511
29,587
31,098
1,408
29,690
2004
2014
35 years
Kingsdale Chateau
Kingston
ON
13,701
2,221
36,272
(5,985
)
1,865
30,643
32,508
1,486
31,022
2000
2014
35 years
Crystal View Lodge
Nepean
ON
—
1,587
37,243
(5,659
)
1,457
31,714
33,171
1,532
31,639
2000
2014
35 years
The Court at Barrhaven
Nepean
ON
—
1,778
33,922
(4,861
)
1,493
29,346
30,839
1,395
29,444
2004
2014
35 years
Stamford Estates
Niagara Falls
ON
10,640
1,414
29,439
(4,721
)
1,188
24,944
26,132
1,245
24,887
2005
2014
35 years
Sherbrooke Heights
Peterborough
ON
13,110
2,485
33,747
(5,217
)
2,090
28,925
31,015
1,406
29,609
2001
2014
35 years
Anchor Pointe
St. Catharines
ON
12,379
8,214
24,056
(4,980
)
6,898
20,392
27,290
1,136
26,154
2000
2014
35 years
The Court at Pringle Creek
Whitby
ON
—
2,965
39,206
(6,137
)
2,490
33,544
36,034
1,610
34,424
2002
2014
35 years
158
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Bethlehem
Bethlehem
PA
—
2,479
22,870
622
2,484
23,487
25,971
4,201
21,770
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Center City
Philadelphia
PA
22,662
3,460
18,291
1,770
3,460
20,061
23,521
3,844
19,677
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbridge Place
Phoenixville
PA
—
1,510
19,130
593
1,510
19,723
21,233
3,456
17,777
1996
2011
35 years
Atria South Hills
Pittsburgh
PA
—
880
10,884
484
895
11,353
12,248
2,333
9,915
1998
2011
35 years
La Residence Steger
Saint-Laurent
QC
5,233
1,995
10,926
(1,717
)
1,676
9,528
11,204
631
10,573
1999
2014
35 years
Atria Bay Spring Village
Barrington
RI
—
2,000
33,400
2,120
2,075
35,445
37,520
6,464
31,056
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Harborhill Place
East Greenwich
RI
—
2,089
21,702
963
2,115
22,639
24,754
3,814
20,940
1835
2011
35 years
Atria Lincoln Place
Lincoln
RI
—
1,440
12,686
664
1,470
13,320
14,790
2,639
12,151
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Aquidneck Place
Portsmouth
RI
—
2,810
31,623
465
2,810
32,088
34,898
4,919
29,979
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Lake
Columbia
SC
—
670
13,946
639
680
14,575
15,255
2,419
12,836
1999
2011
35 years
Primrose Chateau
Saskatoon
SK
13,046
2,611
32,729
(5,397
)
2,193
27,750
29,943
1,355
28,588
1996
2014
35 years
Mulberry Estates
Moose Jaw
SK
13,099
2,173
31,791
(5,177
)
1,824
26,963
28,787
1,335
27,452
2003
2014
35 years
Queen Victoria
Regina
SK
—
3,018
34,109
(5,545
)
2,534
29,048
31,582
1,389
30,193
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Weston Place
Knoxville
TN
9,532
793
7,961
952
967
8,739
9,706
1,783
7,923
1993
2011
35 years
Atria Village at Arboretum
Austin
TX
—
8,280
61,764
445
8,295
62,194
70,489
6,903
63,586
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Collier Park
Beaumont
TX
—
—
—
794
2
792
794
273
521
1996
2012
35 years
Atria Carrollton
Carrollton
TX
6,901
360
20,465
946
364
21,407
21,771
3,662
18,109
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Grapevine
Grapevine
TX
—
2,070
23,104
448
2,070
23,552
25,622
3,889
21,733
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Westchase
Houston
TX
—
2,318
22,278
583
2,322
22,857
25,179
3,900
21,279
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Kingwood
Kingwood
TX
—
1,170
4,518
433
1,189
4,932
6,121
1,153
4,968
1998
2011
35 years
Atria at Hometown
North Richland Hills
TX
—
1,932
30,382
594
1,958
30,950
32,908
3,143
29,765
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Canyon Creek
Plano
TX
—
3,110
45,999
724
3,138
46,695
49,833
4,634
45,199
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Richardson
Richardson
TX
—
1,590
23,662
652
1,595
24,309
25,904
4,008
21,896
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cypresswood
Spring
TX
—
880
9,192
728
887
9,913
10,800
1,786
9,014
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Sugar Land
Sugar Land
TX
—
970
17,542
677
978
18,211
19,189
3,037
16,152
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Copeland
Tyler
TX
—
1,879
17,901
636
1,881
18,535
20,416
3,251
17,165
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Park
Tyler
TX
—
920
31,271
707
928
31,970
32,898
5,619
27,279
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Virginia Beach (Hilltop)
Virginia Beach
VA
—
1,749
33,004
532
1,749
33,536
35,285
5,673
29,612
1998
2011
35 years
Amberwood
Port Richey
FL
—
1,320
—
—
1,320
—
1,320
—
1,320
N/A
2011
N/A
Other Projects
—
—
4,307
—
—
4,307
4,307
—
4,307
CIP
CIP
35 years
TOTAL FOR ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
757,066
518,349
4,694,099
182,772
516,626
4,878,594
5,395,220
687,032
4,708,188
OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Elmcroft of Grayson Valley
Birmingham
AL
—
1,040
19,145
474
1,046
19,613
20,659
2,911
17,748
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Byrd Springs
Hunstville
AL
—
1,720
11,270
440
1,723
11,707
13,430
1,914
11,516
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Heritage Woods
Mobile
AL
—
1,020
10,241
458
1,020
10,699
11,719
1,769
9,950
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Halcyon
Montgomery
AL
—
220
5,476
—
220
5,476
5,696
1,434
4,262
1999
2006
35 years
159
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Rosewood Manor (AL)
Scottsboro
AL
—
680
4,038
—
680
4,038
4,718
603
4,115
1998
2011
35 years
West Shores
Hot Springs
AR
—
1,326
10,904
—
1,326
10,904
12,230
3,315
8,915
1988
2005
35 years
Elmcroft of Maumelle
Maumelle
AR
—
1,252
7,601
—
1,252
7,601
8,853
1,991
6,862
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Mountain Home
Mountain Home
AR
—
204
8,971
—
204
8,971
9,175
2,350
6,825
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sherwood
Sherwood
AR
—
1,320
5,693
—
1,320
5,693
7,013
1,491
5,522
1997
2006
35 years
Chandler Memory Care Community
Chandler
AZ
—
2,910
—
9,066
3,094
8,882
11,976
1,303
10,673
2011
2011
35 years
Cottonwood Village
Cottonwood
AZ
—
1,200
15,124
—
1,200
15,124
16,324
4,571
11,753
1986
2005
35 years
Silver Creek Inn Memory Care Community
Gilbert
AZ
—
890
5,918
—
890
5,918
6,808
745
6,063
2012
2012
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Green Valley
Green Valley
AZ
—
1,227
13,977
—
1,227
13,977
15,204
507
14,697
1998
2014
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lake Havasu City
Lake Havasu
AZ
—
594
14,792
—
594
14,792
15,386
533
14,853
1999
2014
35 years
Lakeview Terrace
Lake Havasu City
AZ
—
706
7,810
—
706
7,810
8,516
264
8,252
2009
2015
35 years
160
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Arbor Rose
Mesa
AZ
—
1,100
11,880
2,434
1,100
14,314
15,414
2,855
12,559
1999
2011
35 years
The Stratford
Phoenix
AZ
—
1,931
33,576
—
1,931
33,576
35,507
1,213
34,294
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Creek Inn Memory Care
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,310
6,322
676
2,185
7,123
9,308
51
9,257
1986
2011
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Sierra Vista
Sierra Vista
AZ
—
295
13,224
—
295
13,224
13,519
475
13,044
1999
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
1,090
12,942
834
1,090
13,776
14,866
2,158
12,708
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of River Centre
Tucson
AZ
—
1,940
5,195
405
1,940
5,600
7,540
1,075
6,465
1999
2011
35 years
Sierra Ridge Memory Care
Auburn
CA
—
681
6,071
—
681
6,071
6,752
247
6,505
2011
2014
35 years
Careage Banning
Banning
CA
—
2,970
16,037
—
2,970
16,037
19,007
2,549
16,458
2004
2011
35 years
Las Villas Del Carlsbad
Carlsbad
CA
—
1,760
30,469
—
1,760
30,469
32,229
7,980
24,249
1987
2006
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Chico
Chico
CA
—
1,069
14,929
—
1,069
14,929
15,998
540
15,458
1998
2014
35 years
Villa Bonita
Chula Vista
CA
—
1,610
9,169
—
1,610
9,169
10,779
1,547
9,232
1989
2011
35 years
The Meadows Senior Living
Elk Grove
CA
—
1,308
19,667
—
1,308
19,667
20,975
787
20,188
2003
2014
35 years
Las Villas Del Norte
Escondido
CA
—
2,791
32,632
—
2,791
32,632
35,423
8,546
26,877
1986
2006
35 years
Alder Bay Assisted Living
Eureka
CA
—
1,170
5,228
(70
)
1,170
5,158
6,328
862
5,466
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of La Mesa
La Mesa
CA
—
2,431
6,101
—
2,431
6,101
8,532
1,598
6,934
1997
2006
35 years
Grossmont Gardens
La Mesa
CA
—
9,104
59,349
—
9,104
59,349
68,453
15,544
52,909
1964
2006
35 years
Palms, The
La Mirada
CA
—
2,700
43,919
—
2,700
43,919
46,619
3,305
43,314
1990
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lancaster
Lancaster
CA
—
718
10,459
—
718
10,459
11,177
378
10,799
1999
2014
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Marysville
Marysville
CA
—
741
7,467
—
741
7,467
8,208
271
7,937
1999
2014
35 years
Mountview Retirement Residence
Montrose
CA
—
1,089
15,449
—
1,089
15,449
16,538
4,046
12,492
1974
2006
35 years
Redwood Retirement
Napa
CA
—
2,798
12,639
—
2,798
12,639
15,437
972
14,465
1986
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Oroville
Oroville
CA
—
638
8,079
—
638
8,079
8,717
293
8,424
1999
2014
35 years
Valencia Commons
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
1,439
36,363
—
1,439
36,363
37,802
2,728
35,074
2002
2013
35 years
Mission Hills
Rancho Mirage
CA
—
6,800
3,637
—
6,800
3,637
10,437
969
9,468
1999
2011
35 years
Shasta Estates
Redding
CA
—
1,180
23,463
—
1,180
23,463
24,643
1,763
22,880
2009
2013
35 years
The Vistas
Redding
CA
—
1,290
22,033
—
1,290
22,033
23,323
3,197
20,126
2007
2011
35 years
Casa de Santa Fe
Rocklin
CA
20,024
4,427
52,064
—
4,427
52,064
56,491
1,613
54,878
2001
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Point Loma
San Diego
CA
—
2,117
6,865
—
2,117
6,865
8,982
1,798
7,184
1999
2006
35 years
Regency of Evergreen Valley
San Jose
CA
—
2,700
7,994
—
2,700
7,994
10,694
1,585
9,109
1998
2011
35 years
Villa del Obispo
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
2,660
9,560
54
2,660
9,614
12,274
1,531
10,743
1985
2011
35 years
Villa Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara
CA
—
1,219
12,426
—
1,219
12,426
13,645
3,769
9,876
1977
2005
35 years
Summerhill Villa
Santa Clarita
CA
—
3,880
38,366
—
3,880
38,366
42,246
1,210
41,036
2001
2015
35 years
Skyline Place Senior Living
Sonora
CA
—
1,815
28,472
—
1,815
28,472
30,287
1,145
29,142
1996
2014
35 years
161
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Oak Terrace Memory Care
Soulsbyville
CA
—
1,146
5,275
—
1,146
5,275
6,421
219
6,202
1999
2014
35 years
Eagle Lake Village
Susanville
CA
—
1,165
6,719
—
1,165
6,719
7,884
772
7,112
2006
2012
35 years
Bonaventure, The
Ventura
CA
—
5,294
32,747
—
5,294
32,747
38,041
2,498
35,543
2005
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Visalia
Visalia
CA
—
1,300
8,378
—
1,300
8,378
9,678
307
9,371
1998
2014
35 years
Vista Village
Vista
CA
—
1,630
5,640
61
1,630
5,701
7,331
1,051
6,280
1980
2011
35 years
Rancho Vista
Vista
CA
—
6,730
21,828
—
6,730
21,828
28,558
5,717
22,841
1982
2006
35 years
Westminster Terrace
Westminster
CA
—
1,700
11,514
18
1,700
11,532
13,232
1,699
11,533
2001
2011
35 years
Highland Trail
Broomfield
CO
—
2,511
26,431
—
2,511
26,431
28,942
1,998
26,944
2009
2013
35 years
Caley Ridge
Englewood
CO
—
1,157
13,133
—
1,157
13,133
14,290
1,508
12,782
1999
2012
35 years
Garden Square at Westlake
Greeley
CO
—
630
8,211
—
630
8,211
8,841
1,258
7,583
1998
2011
35 years
Garden Square of Greeley
Greeley
CO
—
330
2,735
—
330
2,735
3,065
436
2,629
1995
2011
35 years
Lakewood Estates
Lakewood
CO
—
1,306
21,137
—
1,306
21,137
22,443
1,591
20,852
1988
2013
35 years
Sugar Valley Estates
Loveland
CO
—
1,255
21,837
—
1,255
21,837
23,092
1,643
21,449
2009
2013
35 years
Devonshire Acres
Sterling
CO
—
950
13,569
(2,989
)
950
10,580
11,530
1,580
9,950
1979
2011
35 years
Gardenside Terrace
Branford
CT
—
7,000
31,518
—
7,000
31,518
38,518
4,578
33,940
1999
2011
35 years
Hearth at Tuxis Pond
Madison
CT
—
1,610
44,322
—
1,610
44,322
45,932
6,124
39,808
2002
2011
35 years
White Oaks
Manchester
CT
—
2,584
34,507
—
2,584
34,507
37,091
2,602
34,489
2007
2013
35 years
Hampton Manor Belleview
Belleview
FL
—
390
8,337
—
390
8,337
8,727
1,272
7,455
1988
2011
35 years
Sabal House
Cantonment
FL
—
430
5,902
—
430
5,902
6,332
876
5,456
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Coral Springs
Coral Springs
FL
—
3,280
11,877
—
3,280
11,877
15,157
1,871
13,286
1999
2011
35 years
Stanley House
Defuniak Springs
FL
—
410
5,659
—
410
5,659
6,069
841
5,228
1999
2011
35 years
The Peninsula
Hollywood
FL
—
3,660
9,122
—
3,660
9,122
12,782
1,663
11,119
1972
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Timberlin Parc
Jacksonville
FL
—
455
5,905
—
455
5,905
6,360
1,547
4,813
1998
2006
35 years
Forsyth House
Milton
FL
—
610
6,503
—
610
6,503
7,113
954
6,159
1999
2011
35 years
Lexington Park - Lake Lady, FL
Lady Lake
FL
—
3,752
26,265
—
3,752
26,265
30,017
827
29,190
2010
2015
35 years
Princeton Village of Largo
Largo
FL
—
1,718
10,438
—
1,718
10,438
12,156
413
11,743
1992
2015
35 years
Barrington Terrace of Fort Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
2,105
18,190
—
2,105
18,190
20,295
650
19,645
2001
2015
35 years
Barrington Terrace of Naples
Naples
FL
—
2,596
18,716
—
2,596
18,716
21,312
684
20,628
2004
2015
35 years
The Carlisle Naples
Naples
FL
—
8,406
78,091
—
8,406
78,091
86,497
10,975
75,522
1998
2011
35 years
Naples ALZ Development
Naples
FL
—
2,983
—
—
2,983
—
2,983
—
2,983
CIP
CIP
CIP
Hampton Manor at 24th Road
Ocala
FL
—
690
8,767
—
690
8,767
9,457
1,288
8,169
1996
2011
35 years
Hampton Manor at Deerwood
Ocala
FL
—
790
5,605
307
790
5,912
6,702
922
5,780
2005
2011
35 years
Las Palmas
Palm Coast
FL
—
984
30,009
—
984
30,009
30,993
2,250
28,743
2009
2013
35 years
Princeton Village of Palm Coast
Palm Coast
FL
—
1,958
24,525
—
1,958
24,525
26,483
808
25,675
2007
2015
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
2,230
2,362
143
2,230
2,505
4,735
580
4,155
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia House
Quincy
FL
—
400
5,190
—
400
5,190
5,590
785
4,805
1999
2011
35 years
162
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Outlook Pointe at Tallahassee
Tallahassee
FL
—
2,430
17,745
159
2,430
17,904
20,334
2,742
17,592
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia Place
Tallahassee
FL
—
640
8,013
—
640
8,013
8,653
1,153
7,500
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Tamarac
Tamarac
FL
—
3,920
14,130
—
3,920
14,130
18,050
2,153
15,897
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Carrolwood
Tampa
FL
—
5,410
20,944
601
5,410
21,545
26,955
3,274
23,681
2001
2011
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Athens
Athens
GA
—
1,767
16,442
—
1,767
16,442
18,209
521
17,688
1998
2015
35 years
Arbor Terrace at Cascade
Atlanta
GA
—
3,052
9,040
—
3,052
9,040
12,092
422
11,670
1999
2015
35 years
Augusta Gardens
Augusta
GA
—
530
10,262
32
530
10,294
10,824
1,544
9,280
1997
2011
35 years
Benton House of Covington GA
Covington
GA
7,871
1,297
11,397
—
1,297
11,397
12,694
383
12,311
2009
2015
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Decatur
Decatur
GA
10,664
3,102
19,599
—
3,102
19,599
22,701
618
22,083
1990
2015
35 years
Benton House of Douglasville GA
Douglasville
GA
—
1,697
15,542
—
1,697
15,542
17,239
521
16,718
2010
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinez
Martinez
GA
—
408
6,764
—
408
6,764
7,172
1,643
5,529
1997
2007
35 years
Benton House of Newnan GA
Newnan
GA
—
1,474
17,487
—
1,474
17,487
18,961
565
18,396
2010
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Roswell
Roswell
GA
—
1,867
15,835
—
1,867
15,835
17,702
531
17,171
1997
2014
35 years
Benton Village of Stockbridge GA
Stockbridge
GA
—
2,221
21,989
—
2,221
21,989
24,210
726
23,484
2008
2015
35 years
Benton House of Sugar Hill GA
Sugar Hill
GA
—
2,173
14,937
—
2,173
14,937
17,110
520
16,590
2010
2015
35 years
Villas of St. James - Breese, IL
Breese
IL
—
671
6,849
—
671
6,849
7,520
268
7,252
2009
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Chatham, IL
Chatham
IL
—
1,185
8,910
—
1,185
8,910
10,095
358
9,737
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Effingham, IL
Effingham
IL
—
508
6,624
—
508
6,624
7,132
252
6,880
2011
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Herrin, IL
Herrin
IL
—
2,175
9,605
—
2,175
9,605
11,780
445
11,335
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Marshall, IL
Marshall
IL
—
1,461
4,881
—
1,461
4,881
6,342
263
6,079
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Newton, IL
Newton
IL
—
458
4,590
—
458
4,590
5,048
194
4,854
2011
2015
35 years
Wyndcrest Assisted Living
Rochester
IL
—
570
6,536
—
570
6,536
7,106
241
6,865
2005
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook, Shelbyville, IL
Shelbyville
IL
—
2,292
3,351
—
2,292
3,351
5,643
289
5,354
2011
2015
35 years
Georgetowne Place
Fort Wayne
IN
—
1,315
18,185
—
1,315
18,185
19,500
5,371
14,129
1987
2005
35 years
The Harrison
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,200
5,740
—
1,200
5,740
6,940
1,823
5,117
1985
2005
35 years
Elmcroft of Muncie
Muncie
IN
—
244
11,218
—
244
11,218
11,462
2,724
8,738
1998
2007
35 years
Wood Ridge
South Bend
IN
—
590
4,850
(35
)
590
4,815
5,405
768
4,637
1990
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Florence
Florence
KY
—
1,535
21,826
—
1,535
21,826
23,361
727
22,634
2010
2014
35 years
Hartland Hills
Lexington
KY
—
1,468
23,929
—
1,468
23,929
25,397
1,801
23,596
2001
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Mount Washington
Mount Washington
KY
—
758
12,048
—
758
12,048
12,806
401
12,405
2005
2014
35 years
Heritage Woods
Agawam
MA
—
1,249
4,625
—
1,249
4,625
5,874
2,128
3,746
1997
2004
30 years
Devonshire Estates
Lenox
MA
—
1,832
31,124
—
1,832
31,124
32,956
2,341
30,615
1998
2013
35 years
163
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Outlook Pointe at Hagerstown
Hagerstown
MD
—
2,010
1,293
100
2,010
1,393
3,403
407
2,996
1999
2011
35 years
Clover Healthcare
Auburn
ME
—
1,400
26,895
732
1,400
27,627
29,027
4,164
24,863
1982
2011
35 years
Gorham House
Gorham
ME
—
1,360
33,147
1,472
1,527
34,452
35,979
4,750
31,229
1990
2011
35 years
Kittery Estates
Kittery
ME
—
1,531
30,811
—
1,531
30,811
32,342
2,315
30,027
2009
2013
35 years
Woods at Canco
Portland
ME
—
1,441
45,578
—
1,441
45,578
47,019
3,416
43,603
2000
2013
35 years
Sentry Hill
York Harbor
ME
—
3,490
19,869
—
3,490
19,869
23,359
2,870
20,489
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Downriver
Brownstown Charter Township
MI
—
320
32,652
415
371
33,016
33,387
4,654
28,733
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of East Lansing
East Lansing
MI
—
1,956
18,122
—
1,956
18,122
20,078
1,950
18,128
1989
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Kentwood
Kentwood
MI
—
510
13,976
499
510
14,475
14,985
2,357
12,628
2001
2011
35 years
Primrose Austin
Austin
MN
—
2,540
11,707
—
2,540
11,707
14,247
1,651
12,596
2002
2011
35 years
Primrose Duluth
Duluth
MN
—
6,190
8,296
21
6,190
8,317
14,507
1,344
13,163
2003
2011
35 years
Primrose Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
1,860
8,920
17
1,860
8,937
10,797
1,376
9,421
1999
2011
35 years
Rose Arbor
Maple Grove
MN
—
1,140
12,421
—
1,140
12,421
13,561
4,868
8,693
2000
2006
35 years
Wildflower Lodge
Maple Grove
MN
—
504
5,035
—
504
5,035
5,539
1,978
3,561
1981
2006
35 years
Lodge at White Bear
White Bear Lake
MN
—
732
24,999
—
732
24,999
25,731
1,873
23,858
2002
2013
35 years
Assisted Living at the Meadowlands - O'Fallon, MO
O'Fallon
MO
—
2,326
14,158
—
2,326
14,158
16,484
553
15,931
1999
2015
35 years
Canyon Creek Inn Memory Care
Billings
MT
—
420
11,217
7
420
11,224
11,644
1,533
10,111
2011
2011
35 years
Springs at Missoula
Missoula
MT
16,009
1,975
34,390
—
1,975
34,390
36,365
3,722
32,643
2004
2012
35 years
Carillon ALF of Asheboro
Asheboro
NC
—
680
15,370
—
680
15,370
16,050
2,202
13,848
1998
2011
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Asheville
Asheville
NC
9,234
1,365
15,679
—
1,365
15,679
17,044
518
16,526
1998
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Little Avenue
Charlotte
NC
—
250
5,077
—
250
5,077
5,327
1,330
3,997
1997
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Cramer Mountain
Cramerton
NC
—
530
18,225
—
530
18,225
18,755
2,635
16,120
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Harrisburg
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,660
15,130
—
1,660
15,130
16,790
2,175
14,615
1997
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
NC
—
2,210
7,372
—
2,210
7,372
9,582
1,205
8,377
2005
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hillsborough
Hillsborough
NC
—
1,450
19,754
—
1,450
19,754
21,204
2,792
18,412
2005
2011
35 years
Willow Grove
Matthews
NC
—
763
27,544
—
763
27,544
28,307
2,063
26,244
2009
2013
35 years
Carillon ALF of Newton
Newton
NC
—
540
14,935
—
540
14,935
15,475
2,141
13,334
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of Olde Raleigh
Raleigh
NC
—
1,989
18,648
—
1,989
18,648
20,637
2,050
18,587
1991
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Northridge
Raleigh
NC
—
184
3,592
—
184
3,592
3,776
941
2,835
1984
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Salisbury
Salisbury
NC
—
1,580
25,026
—
1,580
25,026
26,606
3,509
23,097
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Shelby
Shelby
NC
—
660
15,471
—
660
15,471
16,131
2,224
13,907
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Southern Pines
Southern Pines
NC
—
1,196
10,766
—
1,196
10,766
11,962
1,769
10,193
1998
2010
35 years
Carillon ALF of Southport
Southport
NC
—
1,330
10,356
—
1,330
10,356
11,686
1,589
10,097
2005
2011
35 years
164
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Primrose Bismarck
Bismarck
ND
—
1,210
9,768
20
1,210
9,788
10,998
1,425
9,573
1994
2011
35 years
Wellington ALF - Minot ND
Minot
ND
—
3,241
9,509
—
3,241
9,509
12,750
459
12,291
2005
2015
35 years
Crown Pointe
Omaha
NE
—
1,316
11,950
—
1,316
11,950
13,266
3,647
9,619
1985
2005
35 years
Birch Heights
Derry
NH
—
1,413
30,267
—
1,413
30,267
31,680
2,273
29,407
2009
2013
35 years
Bear Canyon Estates
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,879
36,223
—
1,879
36,223
38,102
2,722
35,380
1997
2013
35 years
The Woodmark at Uptown
Albuquerque
NM
—
2,439
33,276
—
2,439
33,276
35,715
1,070
34,645
2000
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Quintessence
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,150
26,527
406
1,165
26,918
28,083
3,818
24,265
1998
2011
35 years
The Woodmark at Sun City
Sun City
NM
—
964
35,093
—
964
35,093
36,057
1,046
35,011
2000
2015
35 years
The Amberleigh
Buffalo
NY
—
3,498
19,097
588
3,498
19,685
23,183
6,000
17,183
1988
2005
35 years
Castle Gardens
Vestal
NY
—
1,830
20,312
2,230
1,885
22,487
24,372
3,869
20,503
1994
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Lima
Lima
OH
—
490
3,368
—
490
3,368
3,858
882
2,976
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Ontario
Mansfield
OH
—
523
7,968
—
523
7,968
8,491
2,087
6,404
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Medina
Medina
OH
—
661
9,788
—
661
9,788
10,449
2,564
7,885
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Washington Township
Miamisburg
OH
—
1,235
12,611
—
1,235
12,611
13,846
3,303
10,543
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sagamore Hills
Northfield
OH
—
980
12,604
—
980
12,604
13,584
3,301
10,283
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lorain
Vermilion
OH
—
500
15,461
499
557
15,903
16,460
2,489
13,971
2000
2011
35 years
Gardens at Westlake - Westlake OH
Westlake
OH
—
2,401
20,640
—
2,401
20,640
23,041
730
22,311
1987
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Xenia
Xenia
OH
—
653
2,801
—
653
2,801
3,454
734
2,720
1999
2006
35 years
Arbor House of Mustang
Mustang
OK
—
372
3,587
—
372
3,587
3,959
360
3,599
1999
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Norman
Norman
OK
—
444
7,525
—
444
7,525
7,969
751
7,218
2000
2012
35 years
Arbor House Reminisce Center
Norman
OK
—
438
3,028
—
438
3,028
3,466
306
3,160
2004
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Midwest City
Oklahoma City
OK
—
544
9,133
—
544
9,133
9,677
911
8,766
2004
2012
35 years
Mansion at Waterford
Oklahoma City
OK
—
2,077
14,184
—
2,077
14,184
16,261
1,629
14,632
1999
2012
35 years
Meadowbrook Place
Baker City
OR
—
1,430
5,311
—
1,430
5,311
6,741
218
6,523
1965
2014
35 years
Edgewood Downs
Beaverton
OR
—
2,356
15,476
—
2,356
15,476
17,832
1,179
16,653
1978
2013
35 years
Princeton Village
Clackamas
OR
2,918
1,126
10,283
—
1,126
10,283
11,409
354
11,055
1999
2015
35 years
Bayside Terrace
Coos Bay
OR
—
498
2,795
—
498
2,795
3,293
152
3,141
2006
2015
35 years
Ocean Ridge
Coos Bay
OR
—
2,681
10,941
—
2,681
10,941
13,622
529
13,093
2006
2015
35 years
Avamere at Hillsboro
Hillsboro
OR
—
4,400
8,353
1,065
4,400
9,418
13,818
1,550
12,268
2000
2011
35 years
The Springs at Tanasbourne
Hillsboro
OR
34,689
4,689
55,035
—
4,689
55,035
59,724
5,599
54,125
2009
2013
35 years
Keizer River ALZ Facility
Keizer
OR
—
922
6,460
60
1,135
6,307
7,442
290
7,152
2012
2014
35 years
Pelican Pointe
Klamath Falls
OR
12,050
943
26,237
—
943
26,237
27,180
836
26,344
2011
2015
35 years
The Stafford
Lake Oswego
OR
—
1,800
16,122
—
1,800
16,122
17,922
2,476
15,446
2008
2011
35 years
The Springs at Clackamas Woods (ILF)
Milwaukie
OR
10,557
1,264
22,429
—
1,264
22,429
23,693
2,428
21,265
1999
2012
35 years
Clackamas Woods Assisted Living
Milwaukie
OR
5,648
681
12,077
—
681
12,077
12,758
1,307
11,451
1999
2012
35 years
Pheasant Pointe
Molalla
OR
—
904
7,433
—
904
7,433
8,337
276
8,061
1998
2015
35 years
165
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Avamere at Newberg
Newberg
OR
—
1,320
4,664
383
1,320
5,047
6,367
889
5,478
1999
2011
35 years
Avamere Living at Berry Park
Oregon City
OR
—
1,910
4,249
2,158
1,910
6,407
8,317
1,122
7,195
1972
2011
35 years
McLoughlin Place Senior Living
Oregon City
OR
—
2,418
26,819
—
2,418
26,819
29,237
1,085
28,152
1997
2014
35 years
Avamere at Bethany
Portland
OR
—
3,150
16,740
—
3,150
16,740
19,890
2,537
17,353
2002
2011
35 years
Cedar Village
Salem
OR
—
868
12,652
—
868
12,652
13,520
418
13,102
1999
2015
35 years
Redwood Heights
Salem
OR
—
1,513
16,774
—
1,513
16,774
18,287
555
17,732
1999
2015
35 years
Avamere at Sandy
Sandy
OR
—
1,000
7,309
224
1,000
7,533
8,533
1,226
7,307
1999
2011
35 years
Suzanne Elise ALF
Seaside
OR
—
1,940
4,027
—
1,940
4,027
5,967
839
5,128
1998
2011
35 years
Necanicum Village
Seaside
OR
—
2,212
7,311
—
2,212
7,311
9,523
181
9,342
2001
2015
35 years
Avamere at Sherwood
Sherwood
OR
—
1,010
7,051
203
1,010
7,254
8,264
1,190
7,074
2000
2011
35 years
Chateau Gardens
Springfield
OR
—
1,550
4,197
—
1,550
4,197
5,747
621
5,126
1991
2011
35 years
166
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Avamere at St Helens
St. Helens
OR
—
1,410
10,496
384
1,410
10,880
12,290
1,663
10,627
2000
2011
35 years
Flagstone Senior Living
The Dalles
OR
—
1,631
17,786
—
1,631
17,786
19,417
718
18,699
1991
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Allison Park
Allison Park
PA
—
1,171
5,686
—
1,171
5,686
6,857
1,489
5,368
1986
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Chippewa
Beaver Falls
PA
—
1,394
8,586
—
1,394
8,586
9,980
2,249
7,731
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Berwick
Berwick
PA
—
111
6,741
—
111
6,741
6,852
1,765
5,087
1998
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Lakemont
Bridgeville
PA
—
1,660
12,624
82
1,660
12,706
14,366
1,996
12,370
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Dillsburg
Dillsburg
PA
—
432
7,797
—
432
7,797
8,229
2,042
6,187
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Altoona
Hollidaysburg
PA
—
331
4,729
—
331
4,729
5,060
1,239
3,821
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
PA
—
240
7,336
—
240
7,336
7,576
1,921
5,655
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lewisburg
Lewisburg
PA
—
232
5,666
—
232
5,666
5,898
1,484
4,414
1999
2006
35 years
Lehigh Commons
Macungie
PA
—
420
4,406
450
420
4,856
5,276
2,112
3,164
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Loyalsock
Montoursville
PA
—
413
3,412
—
413
3,412
3,825
894
2,931
1999
2006
35 years
Highgate at Paoli Pointe
Paoli
PA
—
1,151
9,079
—
1,151
9,079
10,230
3,755
6,475
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Mid Valley
Peckville
PA
—
619
11,662
—
619
11,662
12,281
388
11,893
1998
2014
35 years
Sanatoga Court
Pottstown
PA
—
360
3,233
—
360
3,233
3,593
1,402
2,191
1997
2004
30 years
Berkshire Commons
Reading
PA
—
470
4,301
—
470
4,301
4,771
1,862
2,909
1997
2004
30 years
Mifflin Court
Reading
PA
—
689
4,265
351
689
4,616
5,305
1,728
3,577
1997
2004
35 years
Elmcroft of Reading
Reading
PA
—
638
4,942
—
638
4,942
5,580
1,294
4,286
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Reedsville
Reedsville
PA
—
189
5,170
—
189
5,170
5,359
1,354
4,005
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Saxonburg
Saxonburg
PA
—
770
5,949
—
770
5,949
6,719
1,558
5,161
1994
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shippensburg
Shippensburg
PA
—
203
7,634
—
203
7,634
7,837
1,999
5,838
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of State College
State College
PA
—
320
7,407
—
320
7,407
7,727
1,940
5,787
1997
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at York
York
PA
—
1,260
6,923
85
1,260
7,008
8,268
1,092
7,176
1999
2011
35 years
Garden House of Anderson SC
Anderson
SC
7,871
969
15,613
—
969
15,613
16,582
510
16,072
2000
2015
35 years
Forest Pines
Columbia
SC
—
1,058
27,471
—
1,058
27,471
28,529
2,061
26,468
1998
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Florence SC
Florence
SC
—
108
7,620
—
108
7,620
7,728
1,996
5,732
1998
2006
35 years
Primrose Aberdeen
Aberdeen
SD
—
850
659
72
850
731
1,581
231
1,350
1991
2011
35 years
Primrose Place
Aberdeen
SD
—
310
3,242
12
310
3,254
3,564
495
3,069
2000
2011
35 years
Primrose Rapid City
Rapid City
SD
—
860
8,722
—
860
8,722
9,582
1,322
8,260
1997
2011
35 years
Primrose Sioux Falls
Sioux Falls
SD
—
2,180
12,936
99
2,180
13,035
15,215
1,985
13,230
2002
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe of Bristol
Bristol
TN
—
470
16,006
134
470
16,140
16,610
2,274
14,336
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hamilton Place
Chattanooga
TN
—
87
4,248
—
87
4,248
4,335
1,112
3,223
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shallowford
Chattanooga
TN
—
580
7,568
455
582
8,021
8,603
1,442
7,161
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
TN
—
600
5,304
—
600
5,304
5,904
178
5,726
1999
2014
35 years
Regency House
Hixson
TN
—
140
6,611
—
140
6,611
6,751
982
5,769
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Jackson
Jackson
TN
—
768
16,840
—
768
16,840
17,608
559
17,049
1998
2014
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Johnson City
Johnson City
TN
—
590
10,043
222
590
10,265
10,855
1,472
9,383
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Kingsport
Kingsport
TN
—
22
7,815
—
22
7,815
7,837
2,047
5,790
2000
2006
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Knoxville
Knoxville
TN
—
590
15,862
—
590
15,862
16,452
527
15,925
1997
2015
35 years
167
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Elmcroft of Halls
Knoxville
TN
—
387
4,948
—
387
4,948
5,335
165
5,170
1998
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of West Knoxville
Knoxville
TN
—
439
10,697
—
439
10,697
11,136
2,802
8,334
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
TN
—
180
7,086
—
180
7,086
7,266
1,856
5,410
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Bartlett
Memphis
TN
—
570
25,552
343
570
25,895
26,465
3,703
22,762
1999
2011
35 years
Kennington Place
Memphis
TN
—
1,820
4,748
815
1,820
5,563
7,383
1,276
6,107
1989
2011
35 years
Glenmary Senior Manor
Memphis
TN
—
510
5,860
224
510
6,084
6,594
1,245
5,349
1964
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Murfreesboro
Murfreesboro
TN
—
940
8,030
259
940
8,289
9,229
1,233
7,996
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Brentwood
Nashville
TN
—
960
22,020
603
960
22,623
23,583
3,392
20,191
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Arlington
Arlington
TX
—
2,650
14,060
473
2,650
14,533
17,183
2,309
14,874
1998
2011
35 years
Meadowbrook ALZ
Arlington
TX
—
755
4,677
940
755
5,617
6,372
557
5,815
2012
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Austin
Austin
TX
—
2,770
25,820
534
2,770
26,354
29,124
3,856
25,268
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Bedford
Bedford
TX
—
770
19,691
493
770
20,184
20,954
3,009
17,945
1999
2011
35 years
Highland Estates
Cedar Park
TX
—
1,679
28,943
—
1,679
28,943
30,622
2,177
28,445
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Rivershire
Conroe
TX
—
860
32,671
689
860
33,360
34,220
4,785
29,435
1997
2011
35 years
Flower Mound
Flower Mound
TX
—
900
5,512
—
900
5,512
6,412
831
5,581
1995
2011
35 years
Arbor House Granbury
Granbury
TX
—
390
8,186
—
390
8,186
8,576
816
7,760
2007
2012
35 years
Copperfield Estates
Houston
TX
—
1,216
21,135
—
1,216
21,135
22,351
1,590
20,761
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Braeswood
Houston
TX
—
3,970
15,919
626
3,970
16,545
20,515
2,586
17,929
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Cy-Fair
Houston
TX
—
1,580
21,801
419
1,593
22,207
23,800
3,250
20,550
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Irving
Irving
TX
—
1,620
18,755
455
1,620
19,210
20,830
2,874
17,956
1999
2011
35 years
The Solana at Cinco Ranch
Katy
TX
—
3,171
73,287
—
3,171
73,287
76,458
2,136
74,322
2010
2015
35 years
Whitley Place
Keller
TX
—
—
5,100
—
—
5,100
5,100
1,154
3,946
1998
2008
35 years
Elmcroft of Lake Jackson
Lake Jackson
TX
—
710
14,765
417
710
15,182
15,892
2,318
13,574
1998
2011
35 years
Arbor House Lewisville
Lewisville
TX
—
824
10,308
—
824
10,308
11,132
1,031
10,101
2007
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Vista Ridge
Lewisville
TX
—
6,280
10,548
(10,254
)
1,934
4,640
6,574
1,901
4,673
1998
2011
35 years
Polo Park Estates
Midland
TX
—
765
29,447
—
765
29,447
30,212
2,205
28,007
1996
2013
35 years
Arbor Hills Memory Care Community
Plano
TX
—
1,014
5,719
—
1,014
5,719
6,733
476
6,257
2013
2013
35 years
Arbor House of Rockwall
Rockwall
TX
—
1,537
12,883
—
1,537
12,883
14,420
1,296
13,124
2009
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Windcrest
San Antonio
TX
—
920
13,011
526
920
13,537
14,457
2,176
12,281
1999
2011
35 years
Paradise Springs
Spring
TX
—
1,488
24,556
—
1,488
24,556
26,044
1,848
24,196
2008
2013
35 years
Arbor House of Temple
Temple
TX
—
473
6,750
—
473
6,750
7,223
675
6,548
2008
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Cottonwood
Temple
TX
—
630
17,515
405
630
17,920
18,550
2,659
15,891
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Mainland
Texas City
TX
—
520
14,849
504
520
15,353
15,873
2,335
13,538
1996
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Victoria
Victoria
TX
—
440
13,040
425
440
13,465
13,905
2,061
11,844
1997
2011
35 years
Arbor House of Weatherford
Weatherford
TX
—
233
3,347
—
233
3,347
3,580
334
3,246
1994
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Wharton
Wharton
TX
—
320
13,799
658
320
14,457
14,777
2,248
12,529
1996
2011
35 years
Mountain Ridge
South Ogden
UT
11,644
1,243
24,659
—
1,243
24,659
25,902
884
25,018
2001
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Chesterfield
Richmond
VA
—
829
6,534
—
829
6,534
7,363
1,711
5,652
1999
2006
35 years
168
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Pheasant Ridge
Roanoke
VA
—
1,813
9,027
—
1,813
9,027
10,840
1,037
9,803
1999
2012
35 years
Cascade Valley Senior Living
Arlington
WA
—
1,413
6,294
—
1,413
6,294
7,707
240
7,467
1995
2014
35 years
The Bellingham at Orchard
Bellingham
WA
—
3,383
17,553
—
3,383
17,553
20,936
543
20,393
1999
2015
35 years
Bay Pointe
Bremerton
WA
—
2,114
21,006
—
2,114
21,006
23,120
667
22,453
1999
2015
35 years
Cooks Hill Manor
Centralia
WA
—
520
6,144
21
520
6,165
6,685
996
5,689
1993
2011
35 years
Edmonds Landing
Edmonds
WA
—
4,273
27,852
—
4,273
27,852
32,125
815
31,310
2001
2015
35 years
Terrace at Beverly Lake
Everett
WA
—
1,515
12,520
—
1,515
12,520
14,035
380
13,655
1998
2015
35 years
The Sequoia
Olympia
WA
—
1,490
13,724
80
1,490
13,804
15,294
2,077
13,217
1995
2011
35 years
Bishop Place Senior Living
Pullman
WA
—
1,780
33,608
—
1,780
33,608
35,388
1,258
34,130
1998
2014
35 years
Willow Gardens
Puyallup
WA
—
1,959
35,492
—
1,959
35,492
37,451
2,669
34,782
1996
2013
35 years
Birchview
Sedro-Woolley
WA
—
210
14,145
95
210
14,240
14,450
1,957
12,493
1996
2011
35 years
Discovery Memory Care
Sequim
WA
—
320
10,544
45
320
10,589
10,909
1,534
9,375
1961
2011
35 years
The Village Retirement & Assisted Living
Tacoma
WA
—
2,200
5,938
90
2,200
6,028
8,228
1,193
7,035
1976
2011
35 years
Clearwater Springs
Vancouver
WA
—
1,269
9,840
—
1,269
9,840
11,109
369
10,740
2003
2015
35 years
Matthews of Appleton I
Appleton
WI
—
130
1,834
(41
)
130
1,793
1,923
291
1,632
1996
2011
35 years
Matthews of Appleton II
Appleton
WI
—
140
2,016
100
140
2,116
2,256
316
1,940
1997
2011
35 years
Hunters Ridge
Beaver Dam
WI
—
260
2,380
—
260
2,380
2,640
372
2,268
1998
2011
35 years
Harbor House Beloit
Beloit
WI
—
150
4,356
411
191
4,726
4,917
628
4,289
1990
2011
35 years
Harbor House Clinton
Clinton
WI
—
290
4,390
—
290
4,390
4,680
626
4,054
1991
2011
35 years
Creekside
Cudahy
WI
—
760
1,693
—
760
1,693
2,453
288
2,165
2001
2011
35 years
Harmony of Denmark
Denmark
WI
1,086
220
2,228
—
220
2,228
2,448
352
2,096
1995
2011
35 years
Harbor House Eau Claire
Eau Claire
WI
—
210
6,259
—
210
6,259
6,469
870
5,599
1996
2011
35 years
Chapel Valley
Fitchburg
WI
—
450
2,372
—
450
2,372
2,822
375
2,447
1998
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee II
Fox Point
WI
—
1,810
943
37
1,820
970
2,790
218
2,572
1999
2011
35 years
Harmony of Brenwood Park
Franklin
WI
5,672
1,870
13,804
—
1,870
13,804
15,674
1,926
13,748
2003
2011
35 years
Laurel Oaks
Glendale
WI
—
2,390
43,587
594
2,390
44,181
46,571
6,199
40,372
1988
2011
35 years
Harmony of Green Bay
Green Bay
WI
2,827
640
5,008
—
640
5,008
5,648
755
4,893
1990
2011
35 years
Layton Terrace
Greenfield
WI
6,845
3,490
39,201
—
3,490
39,201
42,691
5,690
37,001
1999
2011
35 years
Matthews of Hartland
Hartland
WI
—
640
1,663
43
652
1,694
2,346
322
2,024
1985
2011
35 years
Matthews of Horicon
Horicon
WI
—
340
3,327
(95
)
345
3,227
3,572
564
3,008
2002
2011
35 years
Jefferson
Jefferson
WI
—
330
2,384
—
330
2,384
2,714
372
2,342
1997
2011
35 years
Harmony of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
3,680
1,180
8,717
—
1,180
8,717
9,897
1,240
8,657
1999
2011
35 years
Harbor House Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
710
3,254
2,793
1,156
5,601
6,757
531
6,226
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Madison
Madison
WI
3,809
650
4,279
—
650
4,279
4,929
690
4,239
1998
2011
35 years
Harmony of Manitowoc
Manitowoc
WI
4,470
450
10,101
—
450
10,101
10,551
1,434
9,117
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Manitowoc
Manitowoc
WI
—
140
1,520
—
140
1,520
1,660
229
1,431
1997
2011
35 years
Harmony of McFarland
McFarland
WI
3,415
640
4,647
—
640
4,647
5,287
721
4,566
1998
2011
35 years
Adare II
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
20
110
557
667
110
557
1994
2011
35 years
169
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Adare IV
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
5
110
542
652
104
548
1994
2011
35 years
Adare III
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
5
90
562
652
111
541
1993
2011
35 years
Adare I
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
5
90
562
652
106
546
1993
2011
35 years
Riverview Village
Menomonee Falls
WI
5,413
2,170
11,758
—
2,170
11,758
13,928
1,660
12,268
2003
2011
35 years
The Arboretum
Menomonee Falls
WI
—
5,640
49,083
583
5,640
49,666
55,306
7,389
47,917
1989
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee I
Milwaukee
WI
—
1,800
935
119
1,800
1,054
2,854
222
2,632
1999
2011
35 years
Hart Park Square
Milwaukee
WI
6,600
1,900
21,628
—
1,900
21,628
23,528
3,160
20,368
2005
2011
35 years
Harbor House Monroe
Monroe
WI
—
490
4,964
—
490
4,964
5,454
719
4,735
1990
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah I
Neenah
WI
—
710
1,157
64
713
1,218
1,931
240
1,691
2006
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah II
Neenah
WI
—
720
2,339
(50
)
720
2,289
3,009
403
2,606
2007
2011
35 years
Matthews of Irish Road
Neenah
WI
—
320
1,036
87
320
1,123
1,443
227
1,216
2001
2011
35 years
Matthews of Oak Creek
Oak Creek
WI
—
800
2,167
(2
)
812
2,153
2,965
360
2,605
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Oconomowoc
Oconomowoc
WI
—
400
1,596
—
400
1,596
1,996
—
1,996
2015
2015
35 years
Wilkinson Woods of Oconomowoc
Oconomowoc
WI
—
1,100
12,436
—
1,100
12,436
13,536
1,794
11,742
1992
2011
35 years
Harbor House Oshkosh
Oshkosh
WI
—
190
949
—
190
949
1,139
188
951
1993
2011
35 years
Harmony of Racine
Racine
WI
8,954
590
11,726
—
590
11,726
12,316
1,634
10,682
1998
2011
35 years
Harmony of Commons of Racine
Racine
WI
—
630
11,245
—
630
11,245
11,875
1,583
10,292
2003
2011
35 years
Harmony of Sheboygan
Sheboygan
WI
8,286
810
17,908
—
810
17,908
18,718
2,510
16,208
1996
2011
35 years
Harbor House Sheboygan
Sheboygan
WI
—
1,060
6,208
—
1,060
6,208
7,268
879
6,389
1995
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis I
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,428
(113
)
1,389
1,296
2,685
260
2,425
2000
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis II
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,666
15
1,377
1,674
3,051
297
2,754
2000
2011
35 years
Howard Village of St. Francis
St. Francis
WI
4,800
2,320
17,232
—
2,320
17,232
19,552
2,576
16,976
2001
2011
35 years
Harmony of Stevens Point
Stevens Point
WI
7,562
790
10,081
—
790
10,081
10,871
1,456
9,415
2002
2011
35 years
Harmony Commons of Stevens Point
Stevens Point
WI
—
760
2,242
—
760
2,242
3,002
430
2,572
2005
2011
35 years
Harmony of Stoughton
Stoughton
WI
1,502
490
9,298
—
490
9,298
9,788
1,322
8,466
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Stoughton
Stoughton
WI
—
450
3,191
—
450
3,191
3,641
500
3,141
1992
2011
35 years
Harmony of Two Rivers
Two Rivers
WI
2,413
330
3,538
—
330
3,538
3,868
542
3,326
1998
2011
35 years
Matthews of Pewaukee
Waukesha
WI
—
1,180
4,124
206
1,197
4,313
5,510
741
4,769
2001
2011
35 years
Oak Hill Terrace
Waukesha
WI
4,835
2,040
40,298
—
2,040
40,298
42,338
5,864
36,474
1985
2011
35 years
Harmony of Terrace Court
Wausau
WI
6,730
430
5,037
—
430
5,037
5,467
750
4,717
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Terrace Commons
Wausau
WI
—
740
6,556
—
740
6,556
7,296
983
6,313
2000
2011
35 years
Harbor House Rib Mountain
Wausau
WI
—
350
3,413
—
350
3,413
3,763
500
3,263
1997
2011
35 years
Library Square
West Allis
WI
5,150
1,160
23,714
—
1,160
23,714
24,874
3,455
21,419
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Wisconsin Rapids
Wisconsin Rapids
WI
1,006
520
4,349
—
520
4,349
4,869
686
4,183
2000
2011
35 years
Matthews of Wrightstown
Wrightstown
WI
—
140
376
12
140
388
528
110
418
1999
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Teays Valley
Hurricane
WV
—
1,950
14,489
106
1,950
14,595
16,545
2,049
14,496
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinsburg
Martinsburg
WV
—
248
8,320
—
248
8,320
8,568
2,179
6,389
1999
2006
35 years
170
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Garden Square Assisted Living of Casper
Casper
WY
—
355
3,197
—
355
3,197
3,552
428
3,124
1996
2011
35 years
Whispering Chase
Cheyenne
WY
—
1,800
20,354
—
1,800
20,354
22,154
1,537
20,617
2008
2013
35 years
Ashridge Court
Bexhill-on-Sea
East Sussex
—
2,274
4,791
—
2,274
4,791
7,065
173
6,892
2010
2015
40 years
Inglewood Nursing Home
Eastbourne
East Sussex
—
1,908
3,021
—
1,908
3,021
4,929
126
4,803
2010
2015
40 years
Pentlow Nursing Home
Eastbourne
East Sussex
—
1,964
2,462
—
1,964
2,462
4,426
109
4,317
2007
2015
40 years
Willows Care Home
Romford
Essex
—
4,695
6,983
—
4,695
6,983
11,678
138
11,540
1986
2015
40 years
Cedars Care Home
Southend-on-Sea
Essex
—
2,649
4,925
—
2,649
4,925
7,574
100
7,474
2014
2015
40 years
Mayflower Care Home
Northfleet
Gravesand
—
4,330
7,519
—
4,330
7,519
11,849
152
11,697
2012
2015
40 years
Maples Care Home
Bexleyheath
Kent
—
5,042
7,525
—
5,042
7,525
12,567
150
12,417
2007
2015
40 years
Barty House Nursing Home
Maidstone
Kent
—
3,769
3,089
—
3,769
3,089
6,858
139
6,719
2013
2015
40 years
Tunbridge Wells Care Centre
Tunbridge Wells
Kent
—
4,323
5,869
—
4,323
5,869
10,192
203
9,989
2010
2015
40 years
Heathlands Care Home
Chingford
London
—
5,398
7,967
—
5,398
7,967
13,365
162
13,203
1980
2015
40 years
TOTAL FOR OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
244,234
526,342
4,729,528
31,302
523,209
4,763,963
5,287,172
579,112
4,708,060
TOTAL FOR SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
1,363,146
1,481,140
13,759,148
311,457
1,472,492
14,079,253
15,551,745
2,475,796
13,075,949
171
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #46
Birmingham
AL
—
—
25,298
3,892
—
29,190
29,190
6,094
23,096
2005
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #48
Birmingham
AL
—
—
12,698
418
—
13,116
13,116
2,801
10,315
1989
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #52
Birmingham
AL
—
—
7,608
1,064
—
8,672
8,672
2,213
6,459
1985
2010
35 years
Crestwood Medical Pavilion
Huntsville
AL
4,134
625
16,178
76
625
16,254
16,879
2,626
14,253
1994
2011
35 years
Davita Dialysis - Marked Tree
Marked Tree
AR
—
179
1,580
—
179
1,580
1,759
60
1,699
2009
2015
35 years
West Valley Medical Center
Buckeye
AZ
—
3,348
5,233
—
3,348
5,233
8,581
243
8,338
2011
2015
31 years
Canyon Springs Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
15,322
—
27,497
66
—
27,563
27,563
3,941
23,622
2007
2012
35 years
Mercy Gilbert Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
7,620
720
11,277
559
720
11,836
12,556
2,207
10,349
2007
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza
Glendale
AZ
—
—
12,904
615
20
13,499
13,519
1,929
11,590
1997
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza II
Glendale
AZ
—
—
8,100
472
20
8,552
8,572
1,320
7,252
2001
2011
35 years
Desert Medical Pavilion
Mesa
AZ
—
—
32,768
129
—
32,897
32,897
2,905
29,992
2003
2013
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building I
Mesa
AZ
—
—
11,923
516
—
12,439
12,439
1,758
10,681
1977
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building II
Mesa
AZ
—
—
7,395
101
—
7,496
7,496
1,179
6,317
1980
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building III
Mesa
AZ
—
—
13,665
1,043
—
14,708
14,708
2,093
12,615
1986
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building II
Phoenix
AZ
12,919
—
22,663
589
14
23,238
23,252
3,323
19,929
2002
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building III
Phoenix
AZ
10,649
—
19,521
30
12
19,539
19,551
2,813
16,738
2009
2011
35 years
Papago Medical Park
Phoenix
AZ
—
—
12,172
459
—
12,631
12,631
2,070
10,561
1989
2011
35 years
North Valley Orthopedic Surgery Center
Phoenix
AZ
—
2,800
10,150
—
2,800
10,150
12,950
354
12,596
2006
2015
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza
Burbank
CA
—
1,241
23,322
1,015
1,241
24,337
25,578
4,242
21,336
2004
2011
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza II
Burbank
CA
35,006
491
45,641
221
491
45,862
46,353
6,767
39,586
2008
2011
35 years
Eden Medical Plaza
Castro Valley
CA
—
258
2,455
276
258
2,731
2,989
758
2,231
1998
2011
25 years
United Healthcare - Cypress
Cypress
CA
—
12,883
38,309
—
12,883
38,309
51,192
1,701
49,491
1985
2015
29 years
NorthBay Corporate Headquarters
Fairfield
CA
—
—
19,187
—
—
19,187
19,187
1,837
17,350
2008
2012
35 years
Gateway Medical Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
12,872
24
—
12,896
12,896
1,230
11,666
1986
2012
35 years
Solano NorthBay Health Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,880
—
—
8,880
8,880
843
8,037
1990
2012
35 years
NorthBay Healthcare MOB
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,507
2,280
—
10,787
10,787
997
9,790
2014
2013
35 years
UC Davis Medical
Folsom
CA
—
1,873
10,156
—
1,873
10,156
12,029
385
11,644
1995
2015
35 years
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg I
Glendale
CA
—
6,683
9,589
336
6,683
9,925
16,608
2,305
14,303
1972
2012
23 years
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg II
Glendale
CA
—
4,464
3,731
515
4,464
4,246
8,710
1,270
7,440
1987
2012
19 years
172
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
St. Francis Lynwood Medical
Lynwood
CA
—
688
8,385
730
688
9,115
9,803
2,346
7,457
1993
2011
32 years
PMB Mission Hills
Mission Hills
CA
—
15,468
30,116
4,729
15,468
34,845
50,313
3,095
47,218
2012
2012
35 years
PDP Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
58,490
1,916
77,022
226
1,916
77,248
79,164
11,775
67,389
2007
2011
35 years
PDP Orange
Orange
CA
46,513
1,752
61,647
232
1,761
61,870
63,631
9,680
53,951
2008
2011
35 years
NHP/PMB Pasadena
Pasadena
CA
—
3,138
83,412
8,590
3,138
92,002
95,140
16,041
79,099
2009
2011
35 years
Western University of Health Sciences Medical Pavilion
Pomona
CA
—
91
31,523
—
91
31,523
31,614
4,532
27,082
2009
2011
35 years
Pomerado Outpatient Pavilion
Poway
CA
—
3,233
71,435
2,858
3,233
74,293
77,526
12,439
65,087
2007
2011
35 years
Sutter Medical Center
San Diego
CA
—
—
25,088
1,371
—
26,459
26,459
2,301
24,158
2012
2012
35 years
San Gabriel Valley Medical
San Gabriel
CA
—
914
5,510
346
914
5,856
6,770
1,467
5,303
2004
2011
35 years
Santa Clarita Valley Medical
Santa Clarita
CA
23,000
9,708
20,020
443
9,726
20,445
30,171
3,496
26,675
2005
2011
35 years
Kenneth E Watts Medical Plaza
Torrance
CA
—
262
6,945
1,238
291
8,154
8,445
2,095
6,350
1989
2011
23 years
Vaca Valley Health Plaza
Vacaville
CA
—
—
9,634
2
—
9,636
9,636
912
8,724
1988
2012
35 years
Potomac Medical Plaza
Aurora
CO
—
2,401
9,118
2,181
2,464
11,236
13,700
4,720
8,980
1986
2007
35 years
Briargate Medical Campus
Colorado Springs
CO
—
1,238
12,301
313
1,244
12,608
13,852
3,987
9,865
2002
2007
35 years
Printers Park Medical Plaza
Colorado Springs
CO
—
2,641
47,507
1,415
2,641
48,922
51,563
15,033
36,530
1999
2007
35 years
Green Valley Ranch MOB
Denver
CO
5,797
—
12,139
158
235
12,062
12,297
1,110
11,187
2007
2012
35 years
Community Physicians Pavilion
Lafayette
CO
—
—
10,436
1,590
—
12,026
12,026
2,517
9,509
2004
2010
35 years
Exempla Good Samaritan Medical Center
Lafayette
CO
—
—
4,393
—
—
4,393
4,393
257
4,136
2013
2013
35 years
Dakota Ridge
Littleton
CO
—
2,540
12,901
—
2,540
12,901
15,441
458
14,983
2007
2015
35 years
Avista Two Medical Plaza
Louisville
CO
—
—
17,330
1,676
—
19,006
19,006
4,813
14,193
2003
2009
35 years
The Sierra Medical Building
Parker
CO
—
1,444
14,059
3,072
1,492
17,083
18,575
4,969
13,606
2009
2009
35 years
Crown Point Healthcare Plaza
Parker
CO
—
852
5,210
—
852
5,210
6,062
477
5,585
2008
2013
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building II
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
2,655
875
—
3,530
3,530
984
2,546
1976
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building IV
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
7,266
923
—
8,189
8,189
1,827
6,362
1991
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building III
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
11,947
107
—
12,054
12,054
2,576
9,478
2004
2010
35 years
DePaul Professional Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
6,424
1,856
—
8,280
8,280
2,540
5,740
1987
2010
35 years
Providence Medical Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
2,473
520
—
2,993
2,993
1,081
1,912
1975
2010
35 years
RTS Arcadia
Arcadia
FL
—
345
2,884
—
345
2,884
3,229
533
2,696
1993
2011
30 years
Aventura Medical Plaza
Aventura
FL
—
401
3,338
—
401
3,338
3,739
256
3,483
1996
2015
26 years
RTS Cape Coral
Cape Coral
FL
—
368
5,448
—
368
5,448
5,816
851
4,965
1984
2011
34 years
RTS Englewood
Englewood
FL
—
1,071
3,516
—
1,071
3,516
4,587
589
3,998
1992
2011
35 years
RTS Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,153
4,127
—
1,153
4,127
5,280
773
4,507
1989
2011
31 years
RTS Key West
Key West
FL
—
486
4,380
—
486
4,380
4,866
609
4,257
1987
2011
35 years
173
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
JFK Medical Plaza
Lake Worth
FL
—
453
1,711
139
453
1,850
2,303
691
1,612
1999
2004
35 years
East Pointe Medical Plaza
Leigh Acres
FL
5,260
327
11,816
—
327
11,816
12,143
380
11,763
1994
2015
35 years
Palms West Building 6
Loxahatchee
FL
—
965
2,678
52
965
2,730
3,695
909
2,786
2000
2004
35 years
Bay Medical Plaza
Lynn Haven
FL
9,579
4,215
15,041
—
4,215
15,041
19,256
557
18,699
2003
2015
35 years
Aventura Heart & Health
Miami
FL
15,680
—
25,361
2,979
—
28,340
28,340
9,914
18,426
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Naples
Naples
FL
—
1,152
3,726
—
1,152
3,726
4,878
589
4,289
1999
2011
35 years
Bay Medical Center
Panama City
FL
9,321
82
17,400
—
82
17,400
17,482
559
16,923
1987
2015
35 years
Woodlands Center for Specialized Med
Pensacola
FL
14,914
2,518
24,006
29
2,518
24,035
26,553
3,513
23,040
2009
2012
35 years
RTS Pt. Charlotte
Pt Charlotte
FL
—
966
4,581
—
966
4,581
5,547
760
4,787
1985
2011
34 years
RTS Sarasota
Sarasota
FL
—
1,914
3,889
—
1,914
3,889
5,803
680
5,123
1996
2011
35 years
Capital Regional MOB I
Tallahassee
FL
—
590
8,773
—
590
8,773
9,363
251
9,112
1998
2015
35 years
University Medical Office Building
Tamarac
FL
—
—
6,690
132
—
6,822
6,822
2,316
4,506
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Venice
Venice
FL
—
1,536
4,104
—
1,536
4,104
5,640
690
4,950
1997
2011
35 years
Athens Medical Complex
Athens
GA
—
2,826
18,339
—
2,826
18,339
21,165
625
20,540
2011
2015
35 years
Doctors Center at St. Joseph’s Hospital
Atlanta
GA
—
545
80,152
—
545
80,152
80,697
740
79,957
1978
2015
20 years
Augusta Medical Plaza
Augusta
GA
—
594
4,847
517
594
5,364
5,958
1,474
4,484
1972
2011
25 years
Augusta Professional Building
Augusta
GA
—
687
6,057
657
691
6,710
7,401
1,882
5,519
1983
2011
27 years
Augusta POB I
Augusta
GA
—
233
7,894
507
233
8,401
8,634
2,971
5,663
1978
2012
14 years
Augusta POB II
Augusta
GA
—
735
13,717
159
735
13,876
14,611
3,446
11,165
1987
2012
23 years
Augusta POB III
Augusta
GA
—
535
3,857
212
535
4,069
4,604
1,192
3,412
1994
2012
22 years
Augusta POB IV
Augusta
GA
—
675
2,182
892
675
3,074
3,749
942
2,807
1995
2012
23 years
Cobb Physicians Center
Austell
GA
—
1,145
16,805
919
1,145
17,724
18,869
3,691
15,178
1992
2011
35 years
Summit Professional Plaza I
Brunswick
GA
5,096
1,821
2,974
42
1,821
3,016
4,837
2,669
2,168
2004
2012
31 years
Summit Professional Plaza II
Brunswick
GA
10,829
981
13,818
10
981
13,828
14,809
2,378
12,431
1998
2012
35 years
Columbia Medical Plaza
Evans
GA
—
268
1,497
139
268
1,636
1,904
572
1,332
1940
2011
23 years
Fayette MOB
Fayetteville
GA
—
895
20,669
—
895
20,669
21,564
672
20,892
2004
2015
35 years
Northside East Cobb - 1121
Marietta
GA
—
5,495
16,028
—
5,495
16,028
21,523
590
20,933
1991
2015
35 years
PAPP Clinic
Newnan
GA
—
2,167
5,477
—
2,167
5,477
7,644
253
7,391
1994
2015
30 years
Parkway Physicians Center
Ringgold
GA
—
476
10,017
419
476
10,436
10,912
2,047
8,865
2004
2011
35 years
Riverdale MOB
Riverdale
GA
—
1,025
9,783
—
1,025
9,783
10,808
365
10,443
2005
2015
35 years
Eastside Physicians Center
Snellville
GA
—
1,289
25,019
1,937
1,366
26,879
28,245
7,126
21,119
1994
2008
35 years
Eastside Physicians Plaza
Snellville
GA
—
294
12,948
53
297
12,998
13,295
3,176
10,119
2003
2008
35 years
Rush Copley POB I
Aurora
IL
—
120
27,882
—
120
27,882
28,002
907
27,095
1996
2015
34 years
Rush Copley POB II
Aurora
IL
—
49
27,217
—
49
27,217
27,266
859
26,407
2009
2015
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building I
Barrington
IL
—
152
3,224
83
152
3,307
3,459
274
3,185
1979
2013
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building II
Barrington
IL
—
512
12,977
142
512
13,119
13,631
1,129
12,502
1996
2013
35 years
174
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Trinity Hospital Physician Office Building
Chicago
IL
—
139
3,329
213
139
3,542
3,681
328
3,353
1971
2013
35 years
Advocate Beverly Center
Chicago
IL
—
2,227
10,140
—
2,227
10,140
12,367
495
11,872
1986
2015
25 years
Crystal Lakes Medical Arts
Crystal Lake
IL
—
2,490
19,504
—
2,490
19,504
21,994
702
21,292
2007
2015
35 years
Advocate Good Shepard
Crystal Lake
IL
—
2,444
10,953
—
2,444
10,953
13,397
456
12,941
2008
2015
33 years
Physicians Plaza East
Decatur
IL
—
—
791
612
—
1,403
1,403
596
807
1976
2010
35 years
Physicians Plaza West
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,943
354
—
2,297
2,297
760
1,537
1987
2010
35 years
Kenwood Medical Center
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,900
51
—
3,951
3,951
1,252
2,699
1996
2010
35 years
304 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
8,702
193
—
8,895
8,895
2,115
6,780
2002
2010
35 years
302 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,467
156
—
3,623
3,623
1,147
2,476
1993
2010
35 years
ENTA
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,150
—
—
1,150
1,150
304
846
1996
2010
35 years
301 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
640
—
—
640
640
234
406
1980
2010
35 years
South Shore Medical Building
Decatur
IL
—
902
129
—
902
129
1,031
145
886
1991
2010
35 years
SIU Family Practice
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,689
19
—
1,708
1,708
457
1,251
1997
2010
35 years
Corporate Health Services
Decatur
IL
—
934
1,386
—
934
1,386
2,320
450
1,870
1996
2010
35 years
Rock Springs Medical
Decatur
IL
—
399
495
—
399
495
894
171
723
1990
2010
35 years
575 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
111
739
—
111
739
850
215
635
1984
2010
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building I
Downers Grove
IL
—
407
10,337
228
407
10,565
10,972
886
10,086
1976
2013
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building II
Downers Grove
IL
—
1,013
25,370
366
1,013
25,736
26,749
2,133
24,616
1995
2013
35 years
Eberle Medical Office Building ("Eberle MOB")
Elk Grove Village
IL
—
—
16,315
93
—
16,408
16,408
5,453
10,955
2005
2009
35 years
1425 Hunt Club Road MOB
Gurnee
IL
—
249
1,452
75
249
1,527
1,776
419
1,357
2005
2011
34 years
1445 Hunt Club Drive
Gurnee
IL
—
216
1,405
309
216
1,714
1,930
588
1,342
2002
2011
31 years
Gurnee Imaging Center
Gurnee
IL
—
82
2,731
—
82
2,731
2,813
453
2,360
2002
2011
35 years
Gurnee Center Club
Gurnee
IL
—
627
17,851
—
627
17,851
18,478
3,113
15,365
2001
2011
35 years
South Suburban Hospital Physician Office Building
Hazel Crest
IL
—
191
4,370
150
191
4,520
4,711
427
4,284
1989
2013
35 years
Doctors Office Building III ("DOB III")
Hoffman Estates
IL
—
—
24,550
77
—
24,627
24,627
7,117
17,510
2005
2009
35 years
755 Milwaukee MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
421
3,716
1,012
479
4,670
5,149
1,822
3,327
1990
2011
18 years
890 Professional MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
214
2,630
139
214
2,769
2,983
707
2,276
1980
2011
26 years
Libertyville Center Club
Libertyville
IL
—
1,020
17,176
—
1,020
17,176
18,196
3,077
15,119
1988
2011
35 years
Christ Medical Center Physician Office Building
Oak Lawn
IL
—
658
16,421
51
658
16,472
17,130
1,374
15,756
1986
2013
35 years
Methodist North MOB
Peoria
IL
—
1,025
29,493
—
1,025
29,493
30,518
964
29,554
2010
2015
35 years
Davita Dialysis - Rockford
Rockford
IL
—
256
2,543
—
256
2,543
2,799
98
2,701
2009
2015
35 years
Round Lake ACC
Round Lake
IL
—
758
370
302
785
645
1,430
373
1,057
1984
2011
13 years
Vernon Hills Acute Care Center
Vernon Hills
IL
—
3,376
694
181
3,413
838
4,251
469
3,782
1986
2011
15 years
Wilbur S. Roby Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,653
621
—
3,274
3,274
971
2,303
1992
2010
35 years
175
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Ambulatory Services Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
4,266
1,350
—
5,616
5,616
1,664
3,952
1995
2010
35 years
St. John's Medical Arts Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,281
426
—
2,707
2,707
823
1,884
1973
2010
35 years
Carmel I
Carmel
IN
—
466
5,954
222
466
6,176
6,642
1,149
5,493
1985
2012
30 years
Carmel II
Carmel
IN
—
455
5,976
221
455
6,197
6,652
1,042
5,610
1989
2012
33 years
Carmel III
Carmel
IN
—
422
6,194
385
422
6,579
7,001
960
6,041
2001
2012
35 years
Elkhart
Elkhart
IN
—
1,256
1,973
—
1,256
1,973
3,229
769
2,460
1994
2011
32 years
Lutheran Medical Arts
Fort Wayne
IN
—
702
13,576
—
702
13,576
14,278
469
13,809
2000
2015
35 years
Dupont Road MOB
Fort Wayne
IN
—
633
13,479
—
633
13,479
14,112
501
13,611
2001
2015
35 years
Harcourt Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
519
28,951
1,003
519
29,954
30,473
5,209
25,264
1973
2012
28 years
Cardiac Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
498
27,430
467
498
27,897
28,395
3,939
24,456
1995
2012
35 years
Oncology Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
470
5,703
152
470
5,855
6,325
1,053
5,272
2003
2012
35 years
St. Francis South Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
—
20,649
744
—
21,393
21,393
2,081
19,312
1995
2013
35 years
Methodist Professional Center I
Indianapolis
IN
—
61
37,411
2,896
61
40,307
40,368
6,795
33,573
1985
2012
25 years
Indiana Orthopedic Center of Excellence
Indianapolis
IN
—
967
83,746
—
967
83,746
84,713
1,273
83,440
1997
2015
35 years
United Healthcare - Indy
Indianapolis
IN
—
5,737
32,116
—
5,737
32,116
37,853
1,131
36,722
1988
2015
35 years
LaPorte
La Porte
IN
—
553
1,309
—
553
1,309
1,862
331
1,531
1997
2011
34 years
Mishawaka
Mishawaka
IN
—
3,787
5,543
—
3,787
5,543
9,330
2,244
7,086
1993
2011
35 years
Cancer Care Partners
Mishawaka
IN
—
3,162
28,633
—
3,162
28,633
31,795
914
30,881
2010
2015
35 years
Michiana Oncology
Mishawaka
IN
—
4,577
20,939
—
4,577
20,939
25,516
700
24,816
2010
2015
35 years
DaVita Dialysis - Paoli
Paoli
IN
—
396
2,056
—
396
2,056
2,452
81
2,371
2011
2015
35 years
South Bend
South Bend
IN
—
792
2,530
—
792
2,530
3,322
530
2,792
1996
2011
34 years
Via Christi Clinic
Wichita
KS
—
1,883
7,428
—
1,883
7,428
9,311
290
9,021
2006
2015
35 years
OLBH Same Day Surgery Center MOB
Ashland
KY
—
101
19,066
208
101
19,274
19,375
3,262
16,113
1997
2012
26 years
St. Elizabeth Covington
Covington
KY
—
345
12,790
(16
)
345
12,774
13,119
1,865
11,254
2009
2012
35 years
St. Elizabeth Florence MOB
Florence
KY
—
402
8,279
1,082
402
9,361
9,763
1,713
8,050
2005
2012
35 years
Jefferson Clinic
Louisville
KY
—
—
673
2,018
—
2,691
2,691
109
2,582
2013
2013
35 years
East Jefferson Medical Plaza
Metairie
LA
—
168
17,264
162
168
17,426
17,594
3,974
13,620
1996
2012
32 years
East Jefferson MOB
Metairie
LA
—
107
15,137
280
107
15,417
15,524
3,341
12,183
1985
2012
28 years
Lakeside POB I
Metairie
LA
—
3,334
4,974
2,259
3,334
7,233
10,567
2,090
8,477
1986
2011
22 years
Lakeside POB II
Metairie
LA
—
1,046
802
680
1,046
1,482
2,528
642
1,886
1980
2011
7 years
Fresenius Medical
Metairie
LA
—
1,195
3,797
—
1,195
3,797
4,992
134
4,858
2012
2015
35 years
RTS Berlin
Berlin
MD
—
—
2,216
—
—
2,216
2,216
378
1,838
1994
2011
29 years
Charles O. Fisher Medical Building
Westminster
MD
11,091
—
13,795
1,747
—
15,542
15,542
4,786
10,756
2009
2009
35 years
Medical Specialties Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
19,242
1,366
—
20,608
20,608
4,234
16,374
1989
2010
35 years
176
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
North Professional Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
7,228
1,601
—
8,829
8,829
1,786
7,043
1983
2010
35 years
Borgess Navigation Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
2,391
—
—
2,391
2,391
570
1,821
1976
2010
35 years
Borgess Health & Fitness Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
11,959
244
—
12,203
12,203
2,887
9,316
1984
2010
35 years
Heart Center Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
8,420
383
—
8,803
8,803
2,207
6,596
1980
2010
35 years
Medical Commons Building
Kalamazoo Township
MI
—
—
661
568
—
1,229
1,229
199
1,030
1979
2010
35 years
RTS Madison Heights
Madison Heights
MI
—
401
2,946
—
401
2,946
3,347
483
2,864
2002
2011
35 years
RTS Monroe
Monroe
MI
—
281
3,450
—
281
3,450
3,731
635
3,096
1997
2011
31 years
Bronson Lakeview OPC
Paw Paw
MI
—
3,835
31,564
—
3,835
31,564
35,399
1,141
34,258
2006
2015
35 years
Pro Med Center Plainwell
Plainwell
MI
—
—
697
—
—
697
697
185
512
1991
2010
35 years
Pro Med Center Richland
Richland
MI
—
233
2,267
30
233
2,297
2,530
520
2,010
1996
2010
35 years
Henry Ford Dialysis Center
Southfield
MI
—
589
3,350
—
589
3,350
3,939
120
3,819
2002
2015
35 years
Metro Health
Wyoming
MI
—
1,325
5,479
—
1,325
5,479
6,804
207
6,597
2008
2015
35 years
Spectrum Health
Wyoming
MI
—
2,463
14,353
—
2,463
14,353
16,816
543
16,273
2006
2015
35 years
Cogdell Duluth MOB
Duluth
MN
—
—
33,406
(19
)
—
33,387
33,387
3,254
30,133
2012
2012
35 years
Allina Health
Elk River
MN
—
1,442
7,742
—
1,442
7,742
9,184
267
8,917
2002
2015
35 years
Unitron Hearing
Plymouth
MN
4,000
2,646
8,962
—
2,646
8,962
11,608
475
11,133
2011
2015
29 years
HealthPartners Medical & Dental Clinics
Sartell
MN
—
2,492
15,694
49
2,503
15,732
18,235
2,493
15,742
2010
2012
35 years
Arnold Urgent Care
Arnold
MO
—
1,058
556
95
1,097
612
1,709
365
1,344
1999
2011
35 years
177
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
DePaul Health Center North
Bridgeton
MO
—
996
10,045
794
996
10,839
11,835
2,542
9,293
1976
2012
21 years
DePaul Health Center South
Bridgeton
MO
—
910
12,169
502
910
12,671
13,581
2,374
11,207
1992
2012
30 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB D
Clayton
MO
—
103
2,780
718
103
3,498
3,601
852
2,749
1984
2012
22 years
Fenton Urgent Care Center
Fenton
MO
—
183
2,714
224
189
2,932
3,121
738
2,383
2003
2011
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
305
7,445
2,167
305
9,612
9,917
1,212
8,705
1988
2012
32 years
St. Joseph Medical Mall
Kansas City
MO
—
530
9,115
212
530
9,327
9,857
1,516
8,341
1995
2012
33 years
Carondelet Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
745
12,437
612
745
13,049
13,794
2,256
11,538
1979
2012
29 years
St. Joseph Hospital West Medical Office Building II
Lake Saint Louis
MO
—
524
3,229
156
524
3,385
3,909
659
3,250
2005
2012
35 years
St. Joseph O'Fallon Medical Office Building
O'Fallon
MO
—
940
5,556
9
940
5,565
6,505
839
5,666
1992
2012
35 years
Sisters of Mercy Building
Springfield
MO
5,500
3,427
8,697
—
3,427
8,697
12,124
350
11,774
2008
2015
35 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 1
St. Charles
MO
—
503
4,336
365
503
4,701
5,204
1,227
3,977
1987
2012
20 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 2
St. Charles
MO
—
369
2,963
162
369
3,125
3,494
650
2,844
1999
2012
32 years
Physicians Office Center
St. Louis
MO
—
1,445
13,825
325
1,445
14,150
15,595
3,678
11,917
2003
2011
35 years
12700 Southford Road Medical Plaza
St. Louis
MO
—
595
12,584
1,077
595
13,661
14,256
3,392
10,864
1993
2011
32 years
St Anthony's MOB A
St. Louis
MO
—
409
4,687
607
409
5,294
5,703
1,592
4,111
1975
2011
20 years
St Anthony's MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
350
3,942
437
350
4,379
4,729
1,515
3,214
1980
2011
21 years
Lemay Urgent Care Center
St. Louis
MO
—
2,317
3,120
317
2,339
3,415
5,754
1,261
4,493
1983
2011
22 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
119
4,161
4,278
119
8,439
8,558
1,046
7,512
1979
2012
23 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB C
St. Louis
MO
—
136
6,018
362
136
6,380
6,516
1,263
5,253
1969
2012
20 years
University Physicians - Grants Ferry
Flowood
MS
9,339
2,796
12,125
(13
)
2,796
12,112
14,908
1,922
12,986
2010
2012
35 years
Randolph
Charlotte
NC
—
6,370
2,929
1,155
6,370
4,084
10,454
2,550
7,904
1973
2012
4 years
Mallard Crossing I
Charlotte
NC
—
3,229
2,072
352
3,229
2,424
5,653
1,140
4,513
1997
2012
25 years
Medical Arts Building
Concord
NC
—
701
11,734
502
701
12,236
12,937
2,689
10,248
1997
2012
31 years
Gateway Medical Office Building
Concord
NC
—
1,100
9,904
487
1,100
10,391
11,491
2,249
9,242
2005
2012
35 years
Copperfield Medical Mall
Concord
NC
—
1,980
2,846
287
1,980
3,133
5,113
919
4,194
1989
2012
25 years
Weddington Internal & Pediatric Medicine
Concord
NC
—
574
688
13
574
701
1,275
213
1,062
2000
2012
27 years
Rex Wellness Center
Garner
NC
—
1,348
5,330
—
1,348
5,330
6,678
249
6,429
2003
2015
34 years
Gaston Professional Center
Gastonia
NC
—
833
24,885
704
833
25,589
26,422
3,993
22,429
1997
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Family Physicians
Harrisburg
NC
—
679
1,646
63
679
1,709
2,388
290
2,098
1996
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Medical Mall
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,339
2,292
169
1,339
2,461
3,800
749
3,051
1997
2012
27 years
Birkdale
Huntersville
NC
—
4,271
7,206
292
4,271
7,498
11,769
1,774
9,995
1997
2012
35 years
Birkdale II
Huntersville
NC
—
—
—
27
—
27
27
5
22
2001
2012
35 years
178
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Northcross
Huntersville
NC
—
623
278
36
623
314
937
177
760
1993
2012
22 years
REX Knightdale MOB & Wellness Center
Knightdale
NC
—
—
22,823
425
—
23,248
23,248
2,156
21,092
2009
2012
35 years
Midland Medical Park
Midland
NC
—
1,221
847
58
1,221
905
2,126
370
1,756
1998
2012
25 years
East Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
803
998
(2
)
803
996
1,799
274
1,525
2000
2012
33 years
Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
479
1,297
39
479
1,336
1,815
382
1,433
1990
2012
25 years
Rocky Mount Medical Park
Rocky Mount
NC
—
2,552
7,779
646
2,652
8,325
10,977
1,722
9,255
1991
2012
30 years
English Road Medical Center
Rocky Mount
NC
4,312
1,321
3,747
4
1,321
3,751
5,072
948
4,124
2002
2012
35 years
Rowan Outpatient Surgery Center
Salisbury
NC
—
1,039
5,184
(5
)
1,039
5,179
6,218
863
5,355
2003
2012
35 years
Trinity Health Medical Arts Clinic
Minot
ND
—
935
15,482
—
935
15,482
16,417
718
15,699
1995
2015
26 years
Cooper Health MOB I
Willingboro
NJ
—
1,389
2,742
—
1,389
2,742
4,131
130
4,001
2010
2015
35 years
Cooper Health MOB II
Willingboro
NJ
—
594
5,638
—
594
5,638
6,232
190
6,042
2012
2015
35 years
Salem Medical
Woodstown
NJ
—
275
4,132
—
275
4,132
4,407
138
4,269
2010
2015
35 years
Carson Tahoe Specialty Medical Center
Carson City
NV
—
688
11,346
—
688
11,346
12,034
418
11,616
1981
2015
35 years
Carson Tahoe MOB West
Carson City
NV
—
2,862
27,519
—
2,862
27,519
30,381
1,209
29,172
2007
2015
29 years
Del E Webb Medical Plaza
Henderson
NV
—
1,028
16,993
958
1,028
17,951
18,979
3,574
15,405
1999
2011
35 years
Durango Medical Plaza
Las Vegas
NV
—
3,787
27,738
—
3,787
27,738
31,525
946
30,579
2008
2015
35 years
The Terrace at South Meadows
Reno
NV
6,959
504
9,966
483
504
10,449
10,953
2,203
8,750
2004
2011
35 years
Albany Medical Center MOB
Albany
NY
—
321
18,389
—
321
18,389
18,710
529
18,181
2010
2015
35 years
St. Peter's Recovery Center
Guilderland
NY
—
1,059
9,156
—
1,059
9,156
10,215
354
9,861
1990
2015
35 years
Central NY Medical Center
Syracuse
NY
24,500
1,786
26,101
1,711
1,792
27,806
29,598
4,630
24,968
1997
2012
33 years
Northcountry MOB
Watertown
NY
—
1,320
10,799
—
1,320
10,799
12,119
427
11,692
2001
2015
35 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building I
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
9,632
1,737
—
11,369
11,369
3,769
7,600
1984
2007
35 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building II
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
15,123
2,276
—
17,399
17,399
5,526
11,873
2007
2007
35 years
Riverside North Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
8,420
785
8,519
936
785
9,455
10,240
2,185
8,055
1962
2012
25 years
Riverside South Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
6,311
586
7,298
748
610
8,022
8,632
1,564
7,068
1985
2012
27 years
340 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
5,862
10
9,443
627
10
10,070
10,080
1,691
8,389
1984
2012
29 years
393 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
3,288
61
4,760
218
61
4,978
5,039
1,033
4,006
1970
2012
20 years
141 South Sixth Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
1,544
80
1,113
4
80
1,117
1,197
376
821
1971
2012
14 years
Doctors West Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
4,705
414
5,362
568
414
5,930
6,344
1,046
5,298
1998
2012
35 years
Eastside Health Center
Columbus
OH
4,399
956
3,472
(2
)
956
3,470
4,426
1,112
3,314
1977
2012
15 years
East Main Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
5,226
440
4,771
58
440
4,829
5,269
784
4,485
2006
2012
35 years
179
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Heart Center Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
1,063
12,140
157
1,063
12,297
13,360
2,144
11,216
2004
2012
35 years
Wilkins Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
123
18,062
226
123
18,288
18,411
2,489
15,922
2002
2012
35 years
Grady Medical Office Building
Delaware
OH
1,824
239
2,263
306
239
2,569
2,808
611
2,197
1991
2012
25 years
Dublin Northwest Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
3,118
342
3,278
215
342
3,493
3,835
672
3,163
2001
2012
34 years
Preserve III Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
9,684
2,449
7,025
(66
)
2,449
6,959
9,408
1,297
8,111
2006
2012
35 years
Zanesville Surgery Center
Zanesville
OH
—
172
9,403
—
172
9,403
9,575
1,472
8,103
2000
2011
35 years
Dialysis Center
Zanesville
OH
—
534
855
71
534
926
1,460
371
1,089
1960
2011
21 years
Genesis Children's Center
Zanesville
OH
—
538
3,781
—
538
3,781
4,319
820
3,499
2006
2011
30 years
Medical Arts Building I
Zanesville
OH
—
429
2,405
455
436
2,853
3,289
782
2,507
1970
2011
20 years
Medical Arts Building II
Zanesville
OH
—
485
6,013
340
490
6,348
6,838
1,987
4,851
1995
2011
25 years
Medical Arts Building III
Zanesville
OH
—
94
1,248
—
94
1,248
1,342
371
971
1970
2011
25 years
Primecare Building
Zanesville
OH
—
130
1,344
648
130
1,992
2,122
475
1,647
1978
2011
20 years
Outpatient Rehabilitation Building
Zanesville
OH
—
82
1,541
—
82
1,541
1,623
361
1,262
1985
2011
28 years
Radiation Oncology Building
Zanesville
OH
—
105
1,201
—
105
1,201
1,306
331
975
1988
2011
25 years
Healthplex
Zanesville
OH
—
2,488
15,849
540
2,488
16,389
18,877
3,599
15,278
1990
2011
32 years
Physicians Pavilion
Zanesville
OH
—
422
6,297
1,123
422
7,420
7,842
1,806
6,036
1990
2011
25 years
Zanesville Northside Pharmacy
Zanesville
OH
—
42
635
—
42
635
677
154
523
1985
2011
28 years
Bethesda Campus MOB III
Zanesville
OH
—
188
1,137
128
199
1,254
1,453
321
1,132
1978
2011
25 years
Tuality 7th Avenue Medical Plaza
Hillsboro
OR
18,594
1,516
24,638
429
1,533
25,050
26,583
4,661
21,922
2003
2011
35 years
Professional Office Building I
Chester
PA
—
—
6,283
1,335
—
7,618
7,618
3,420
4,198
1978
2004
30 years
DCMH Medical Office Building
Drexel Hill
PA
—
—
10,424
1,501
—
11,925
11,925
5,326
6,599
1984
2004
30 years
Pinnacle Health
Harrisburg
PA
—
2,574
16,767
—
2,574
16,767
19,341
645
18,696
2002
2015
35 years
Penn State University Outpatient Center
Hershey
PA
57,415
—
55,439
—
—
55,439
55,439
10,717
44,722
2008
2010
35 years
Lancaster Rehabilitation Hospital
Lancaster
PA
—
959
16,610
(16
)
959
16,594
17,553
2,488
15,065
2007
2012
35 years
Lancaster ASC MOB
Lancaster
PA
9,037
593
17,117
25
593
17,142
17,735
2,902
14,833
2007
2012
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Office Building
Reading
PA
—
—
10,823
811
—
11,634
11,634
2,644
8,990
2006
2010
35 years
Crozer - Keystone MOB I
Springfield
PA
—
9,130
47,078
—
9,130
47,078
56,208
1,967
54,241
1996
2015
35 years
Crozer-Keystone MOB II
Springfield
PA
—
5,178
6,523
—
5,178
6,523
11,701
290
11,411
1998
2015
25 years
Doylestown Health & Wellness Center
Warrington
PA
—
4,452
17,383
351
4,497
17,689
22,186
3,311
18,875
2001
2012
34 years
Roper Medical Office Building
Charleston
SC
8,360
127
14,737
2,055
127
16,792
16,919
3,191
13,728
1990
2012
28 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Charleston)
Charleston
SC
—
447
3,946
332
447
4,278
4,725
933
3,792
2003
2012
35 years
Providence MOB I
Columbia
SC
—
225
4,274
200
225
4,474
4,699
1,432
3,267
1979
2012
18 years
180
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Providence MOB II
Columbia
SC
—
122
1,834
36
122
1,870
1,992
620
1,372
1985
2012
18 years
Providence MOB III
Columbia
SC
—
766
4,406
290
766
4,696
5,462
1,135
4,327
1990
2012
23 years
One Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
210
7,939
488
214
8,423
8,637
2,244
6,393
1984
2012
19 years
Three Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
40
10,650
573
40
11,223
11,263
2,548
8,715
1988
2012
25 years
St. Francis Millennium Medical Office Building
Greenville
SC
15,062
—
13,062
10,514
30
23,546
23,576
7,346
16,230
2009
2009
35 years
200 Andrews
Greenville
SC
—
789
2,014
161
789
2,175
2,964
824
2,140
1994
2012
29 years
St. Francis CMOB
Greenville
SC
—
501
7,661
570
501
8,231
8,732
1,333
7,399
2001
2012
35 years
St. Francis Outpatient Surgery Center
Greenville
SC
—
1,007
16,538
38
1,007
16,576
17,583
2,847
14,736
2001
2012
35 years
St. Francis Professional Medical Center
Greenville
SC
—
342
6,337
507
360
6,826
7,186
1,411
5,775
1984
2012
24 years
St. Francis Women's
Greenville
SC
—
322
4,877
106
322
4,983
5,305
1,447
3,858
1991
2012
24 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Greenville)
Greenville
SC
—
88
5,876
66
88
5,942
6,030
1,317
4,713
1998
2012
24 years
Irmo Professional MOB
Irmo
SC
—
1,726
5,414
134
1,726
5,548
7,274
1,361
5,913
2004
2011
35 years
River Hills Medical Plaza
Little River
SC
—
1,406
1,813
30
1,406
1,843
3,249
510
2,739
1999
2012
27 years
Mount Pleasant Medical Office Longpoint
Mount Pleasant
SC
—
670
4,455
91
670
4,546
5,216
1,414
3,802
2001
2012
34 years
Mary Black Westside Medical Office Bldg
Spartanburg
SC
—
291
5,057
94
291
5,151
5,442
1,127
4,315
1991
2012
31 years
Spartanburg ASC
Spartanburg
SC
—
1,333
15,756
—
1,333
15,756
17,089
478
16,611
2002
2015
35 years
Spartanburg Regional MOB
Spartanburg
SC
—
207
17,963
—
207
17,963
18,170
616
17,554
1986
2015
35 years
Wellmont Blue Ridge MOB
Bristol
TN
—
999
5,027
—
999
5,027
6,026
197
5,829
2001
2015
35 years
Health Park Medical Office Building
Chattanooga
TN
6,277
2,305
8,949
33
2,305
8,982
11,287
1,508
9,779
2004
2012
35 years
Peerless Crossing Medical Center
Cleveland
TN
6,643
1,217
6,464
7
1,217
6,471
7,688
1,026
6,662
2006
2012
35 years
St. Mary's Clinton Professional Office Building
Clinton
TN
—
298
618
—
298
618
916
11
905
1988
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Farragut MOB
Farragut
TN
—
221
2,719
—
221
2,719
2,940
29
2,911
1997
2015
39 years
Medical Center Physicians Tower
Jackson
TN
13,246
549
27,074
(7
)
549
27,067
27,616
4,395
23,221
2010
2012
35 years
St. Mary's Physical Therapy & Rehabilitation Center East
Jefferson City
TN
—
120
160
—
120
160
280
6
274
1985
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Physician Professional Office Building
Knoxville
TN
—
138
3,144
—
138
3,144
3,282
41
3,241
1981
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Magdalene Clarke Tower
Knoxville
TN
—
69
4,153
—
69
4,153
4,222
48
4,174
1972
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Medical Office Building
Knoxville
TN
—
136
359
—
136
359
495
10
485
1976
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Ambulatory Surgery Center
Knoxville
TN
—
129
1,012
—
129
1,012
1,141
17
1,124
1999
2015
24 years
Texas Clinic at Arlington
Arlington
TX
—
2,781
24,515
—
2,781
24,515
27,296
846
26,450
2010
2015
35 years
Seton Medical Park Tower
Austin
TX
—
805
41,527
1,391
805
42,918
43,723
5,519
38,204
1968
2012
35 years
181
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Seton Northwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
444
22,632
1,451
444
24,083
24,527
3,354
21,173
1988
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
294
5,311
85
294
5,396
5,690
727
4,963
2004
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza II
Austin
TX
—
447
10,154
20
447
10,174
10,621
1,338
9,283
2009
2012
35 years
BioLife Sciences Building
Denton
TX
—
1,036
6,576
—
1,036
6,576
7,612
257
7,355
2010
2015
35 years
East Houston MOB, LLC
Houston
TX
—
356
2,877
308
328
3,213
3,541
1,356
2,185
1982
2011
15 years
East Houston Medical Plaza
Houston
TX
—
671
426
434
671
860
1,531
531
1,000
1982
2011
11 years
Memorial Hermann
Houston
TX
—
822
14,307
—
822
14,307
15,129
456
14,673
2012
2015
35 years
Scott & White Healthcare
Kingsland
TX
—
534
5,104
—
534
5,104
5,638
186
5,452
2012
2015
35 years
Odessa Regional MOB
Odessa
TX
—
121
8,935
—
121
8,935
9,056
296
8,760
2008
2015
35 years
Legacy Heart Center
Plano
TX
—
3,081
8,890
—
3,081
8,890
11,971
353
11,618
2005
2015
35 years
Seton Williamson Medical Plaza
Round Rock
TX
—
—
15,074
443
—
15,517
15,517
3,741
11,776
2008
2010
35 years
Sunnyvale Medical Plaza
Sunnyvale
TX
—
1,186
15,397
—
1,186
15,397
16,583
586
15,997
2009
2015
35 years
Texarkana ASC
Texarkana
TX
—
814
5,903
—
814
5,903
6,717
247
6,470
1994
2015
30 years
Spring Creek Medical Plaza
Tomball
TX
—
2,165
8,212
—
2,165
8,212
10,377
288
10,089
2006
2015
35 years
251 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,158
12,078
182
1,158
12,260
13,418
1,780
11,638
2006
2011
35 years
253 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,181
11,862
—
1,181
11,862
13,043
1,673
11,370
2009
2011
35 years
MRMC MOB I
Mechanicsville
VA
—
1,669
7,024
356
1,669
7,380
9,049
1,870
7,179
1993
2012
31 years
Henrico MOB
Richmond
VA
—
968
6,189
355
968
6,544
7,512
1,809
5,703
1976
2011
25 years
St. Mary's MOB North (Floors 6 & 7)
Richmond
VA
—
227
2,961
256
227
3,217
3,444
853
2,591
1968
2012
22 years
Virginia Urology Center
Richmond
VA
—
3,822
16,127
—
3,822
16,127
19,949
597
19,352
2004
2015
35 years
St. Francis Cancer Center
Richmond
VA
—
654
18,331
—
654
18,331
18,985
633
18,352
2006
2015
35 years
Bonney Lake Medical Office Building
Bonney Lake
WA
10,712
5,176
14,375
161
5,176
14,536
19,712
2,478
17,234
2011
2012
35 years
Good Samaritan Medical Office Building
Puyallup
WA
14,058
781
30,368
87
781
30,455
31,236
4,210
27,026
2011
2012
35 years
Holy Family Hospital Central MOB
Spokane
WA
—
—
19,085
230
—
19,315
19,315
1,890
17,425
2007
2012
35 years
Physician's Pavilion
Vancouver
WA
—
1,411
32,939
304
1,424
33,230
34,654
6,226
28,428
2001
2011
35 years
Administration Building
Vancouver
WA
—
296
7,856
—
296
7,856
8,152
1,401
6,751
1972
2011
35 years
Medical Center Physician's Building
Vancouver
WA
—
1,225
31,246
1,911
1,246
33,136
34,382
5,502
28,880
1980
2011
35 years
Memorial MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
663
12,626
315
690
12,914
13,604
2,276
11,328
1999
2011
35 years
Salmon Creek MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,325
9,238
—
1,325
9,238
10,563
1,629
8,934
1994
2011
35 years
Fisher's Landing MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,590
5,420
—
1,590
5,420
7,010
1,152
5,858
1995
2011
34 years
Columbia Medical Plaza
Vancouver
WA
—
281
5,266
208
331
5,424
5,755
1,009
4,746
1991
2011
35 years
Appleton Heart Institute
Appleton
WI
—
—
7,775
36
—
7,811
7,811
1,677
6,134
2003
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices West
Appleton
WI
—
—
5,756
60
—
5,816
5,816
1,250
4,566
1989
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices South
Appleton
WI
—
—
9,058
181
—
9,239
9,239
2,043
7,196
1983
2010
39 years
182
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Brookfield Clinic
Brookfield
WI
—
2,638
4,093
—
2,638
4,093
6,731
896
5,835
1999
2011
35 years
Lakeshore Medical Clinic - Franklin
Franklin
WI
—
1,973
7,579
—
1,973
7,579
9,552
296
9,256
2008
2015
34 years
Lakeshore Medical Clinic - Greenfield
Greenfield
WI
—
1,223
13,387
—
1,223
13,387
14,610
431
14,179
2010
2015
35 years
Aurora Health Care - Hartford
Hartford
WI
19,120
3,706
22,019
—
3,706
22,019
25,725
800
24,925
2006
2015
35 years
Hartland Clinic
Hartland
WI
—
321
5,050
—
321
5,050
5,371
942
4,429
1994
2011
35 years
Aurora Healthcare - Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
7,546
19,155
—
7,546
19,155
26,701
711
25,990
2014
2015
35 years
Univ of Wisconsin Health
Monona
WI
5,039
678
8,017
—
678
8,017
8,695
318
8,377
2011
2015
35 years
Theda Clark Medical Center Office Pavilion
Neenah
WI
—
—
7,080
241
—
7,321
7,321
1,525
5,796
1993
2010
39 years
Aylward Medical Building Condo Floors 3 & 4
Neenah
WI
—
—
4,462
7
—
4,469
4,469
1,006
3,463
2006
2010
39 years
Aurora Health Care - Neenah
Neenah
WI
7,840
2,033
9,072
—
2,033
9,072
11,105
354
10,751
2006
2015
35 years
New Berlin Clinic
New Berlin
WI
—
678
7,121
—
678
7,121
7,799
1,428
6,371
1999
2011
35 years
United Healthcare - Onalaska
Onalaska
WI
—
4,623
5,527
—
4,623
5,527
10,150
280
9,870
1995
2015
35 years
WestWood Health & Fitness
Pewaukee
WI
—
823
11,649
—
823
11,649
12,472
2,356
10,116
1997
2011
35 years
Aurora Health Care - Two Rivers
Two Rivers
WI
22,640
5,638
25,308
—
5,638
25,308
30,946
927
30,019
2006
2015
35 years
Watertown Clinic
Watertown
WI
—
166
3,234
—
166
3,234
3,400
582
2,818
2003
2011
35 years
Southside Clinic
Waukesha
WI
—
218
5,273
—
218
5,273
5,491
962
4,529
1997
2011
35 years
Rehabilitation Hospital
Waukesha
WI
—
372
15,636
—
372
15,636
16,008
2,498
13,510
2008
2011
35 years
United Healthcare - Wauwatosa
Wawatosa
WI
—
8,012
15,992
—
8,012
15,992
24,004
718
23,286
1995
2015
35 years
BSG CS, LLC
Waunakee
WI
—
1,060
—
—
1,060
—
1,060
—
1,060
N/A
2012
N/A
TOTAL FOR MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
624,254
395,733
4,132,212
148,775
396,841
4,279,879
4,676,720
632,349
4,044,371
TOTAL FOR ALL PROPERTIES
$
1,987,400
$
2,064,997
$
19,938,231
$
454,804
$
2,056,428
$
20,401,604
$
22,458,032
$
3,544,625
$
18,913,407
183
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE IV
REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE LOANS
December 31, 2015
(Dollars in Thousands)
Location
Number of RE Assets
Interest Rate
Fixed / Variable
Maturity Date
Monthly Debt Service
Face Value
Net Book Value
Prior Liens
First Mortgages
Washington
1
8.00%
F
8/1/2020
167
25,000
24,826
—
Washington
1
6.00%
F
7/5/2017
44
6,187
6,108
—
California
11
9.42%
F
12/31/2017
1,624
176,719
173,451
—
Multiple
3
9.21%
V
6/30/2019
131
17,023
17,023
—
Ohio
5
7.89%
V
10/1/2021
516
78,448
78,448
—
Second Mortgages
Multiple
9
11.25%
V
10/23/2019
48
5,000
4,965
*
Mezzanine Loans
Virginia
1
10.00%
F
12/10/2019
86
10,044
10,044
—
Multiple**
214
8.19%
F/V
12/9/2016
2,963
419,964
419,964
2,184,601
Construction Loans
Colorado
1
8.75%
V
2/6/2021
330
46,436
45,680
—
* The Second Mortgage loan is a $5 million participation in a second lien term loan with an aggregate commitment of $215 million
** The variable portion of this investment has a maturity date of 12/9/2016, with extension options to 12/9/2019.
Mortgage Loan Reconciliation
2015
2014
2013
(in thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
747,456
$
335,656
$
622,139
Additions:
New Loans
88,648
451,269
3,500
Construction Draws
53,708
—
694
Total additions
142,356
451,269
4,194
Deductions:
Principal Repayments
(99,467
)
(21,159
)
(75,738
)
Conversions to Real Property
—
(18,310
)
—
Sales and Syndications
(5,524
)
—
(214,939
)
Total deductions
(104,991
)
(39,469
)
(290,677
)
Ending Balance
$
784,821
$
747,456
$
335,656
184
ITEM 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
ITEM 9A.
Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by Rules 13a-15(b) and 15d-15(b) of the Exchange Act, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
December 31, 2015
. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) were effective as of
December 31, 2015
, at the reasonable assurance level.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The information set forth under “Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting” and “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial Reporting” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference into this Item 9A.
Internal Control Changes
During the fourth quarter of
2015
, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B.
Other Information
Not applicable.
PART III
ITEM 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
The information required by this Item 10 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Proposals Requiring Your Vote—Proposal 1: Election of Directors,” “Our Executive Officers,” “Securities Ownership—Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Corporate Governance—Governance Policies” and “Audit and Compliance Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2016
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2016
.
ITEM 11.
Executive Compensation
The information required by this Item 11 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Executive Compensation,” “Non-Employee Director Compensation” and “Executive Compensation Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2016
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2016
.
ITEM 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
The information required by this Item 12 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Equity Compensation Plan Information” and “Securities Ownership” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2016
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2016
.
ITEM 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
The information required by this Item 13 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Corporate Governance—Transactions with Related Persons,” “Our Board of Directors—Director Independence,” “Audit and Compliance Committee,” “Executive Compensation Committee” and “Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2016
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2016
.
185
ITEM 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The information required by this Item 14 is incorporated by reference to the material under the heading “Proposals Requiring Your Vote—Proposal 2: Ratification of the Selection of KPMG LLP as Our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for Fiscal Year
2016
” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2016
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2016
.
186
PART IV
ITEM 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules
The following documents have been included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
Page
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
79
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
141
Schedule III — Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
142
Schedule IV — Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
184
All other schedules have been omitted because they are inapplicable, not required or the information is included elsewhere in the Consolidated Financial Statements or notes thereto.
187
Exhibits
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
2.1
Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
3.1
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011.
3.2
Fourth Amended and Restated Bylaws, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011.
4.1
Specimen common stock certificate.
Filed herewith.
4.2
Indenture dated as of September 19, 2006 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuer(s), the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.9 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on April 7, 2006, File No. 333-133115.
4.3
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 17, 2011 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.750% Senior Notes due 2021.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 20, 2011.
4.4
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of February 10, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on February 14, 2012.
4.5
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.000% Senior Notes due 2019.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 18, 2012.
4.6
Seventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of August 3, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012.
4.7
Eighth Supplemental Indenture dated as of December 13, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.000% Senior Notes due 2018.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 13, 2012.
4.8
Ninth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 7, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.450% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Registration Statement on Form 8-A, filed on March 7, 2013.
188
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.9
Tenth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 19, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.700% Senior Notes due 2020.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 19, 2013.
4.10
Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.7 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on April 2, 2012, File No. 333-180521.
4.11
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 1.550% Senior Notes due 2016.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 26, 2013.
4.12
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.700% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 26, 2013.
4.13
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2014 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 1.250% Senior Notes due 2017.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 17, 2014.
4.14
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2014 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.750% Senior Notes due 2024.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 17, 2014.
4.15
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.500% Senior Notes due 2025.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015.
4.16
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.375% Senior Notes due 2045.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015.
4.17
Indenture dated as of August 19, 1997 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and The Bank of New York, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on July 25, 1997, File No. 333-32135.
4.18
Indenture dated as of January 13, 1999 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and Chase Manhattan Bank and Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on January 15, 1999, File No. 333-70707.
4.19
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 18, 2005 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 11, 2005, File No. 001-09028.
189
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.20
Indenture dated as September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Canadian Finance Limited, the Guarantors parties thereto from time to time and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.21
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.22
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.23
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 13, 2015 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.30% Senior Notes, Series C due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.24 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
4.24
Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015.
4.25
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes due 2026.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015.
10.1
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to our Registration Statement on Form S-4, as amended, filed on June 19, 2002, File No. 333-89312.
10.2
Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement, dated as of December 9, 2013, among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc. and Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender, L/C Issuer and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 9, 2013.
10.3
First Amendment dated as of July 28, 2015 to that certain Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc. and Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender, L/C Issuer and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 31, 2015.
190
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.4
Second Amendment and Joinder dated as of October 14, 2015 to that certain Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, Ventas UK Finance, Inc., Ventas Euro Finance, LLC, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc. and Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender L/C Issuer and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on October 19, 2015.
10.5
Transition Services Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
10.6
Tax Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
10.7
Employee Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
10.8*
Ventas, Inc. 2004 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
10.9.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.9.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
10.9.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
10.10.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012.
10.10.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.10.3*
Form of Amendment to Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012.
10.10.4*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.11.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 23, 2012.
10.11.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
10.11.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
10.11.4*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
191
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.11.5*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.11.6*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.12.1*
Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.12.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.13.1*
Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.13.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K fir the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.14.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Appendix B to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. definitive Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting, filed on March 24, 2005, File No. 001-09028.
10.14.2*
First Amendment to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan, dated October 28, 2008.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
10.15.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, File No. 001-09028.
10.15.2*
Amendment to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
10.16*
Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and Debra A. Cafaro.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011.
10.17.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of July 31, 1998 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
10.17.2*
Amendment dated as of September 30, 1999 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
10.17.3*
Amendment dated as of March 19, 2007 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 23, 2007.
10.17.4*
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.17.5*
Amended and Restated Change-in-Control Severance Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011.
10.18*
Consulting Agreement dated December 31, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Richard A. Schweinhart.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 7, 2015.
192
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.19.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of September 18, 2002 between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002.
10.19.2*
Amendment dated as of March 19, 2007 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 23, 2007.
10.19.3*
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.20*
Employment Agreement dated as of June 22, 2010 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
10.21*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated as of October 21, 2013 between Ventas, Inc. and John D. Cobb.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.
10.22.1*
Offer Letter dated September 16, 2014 from Ventas, Inc. to Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014.
10.22.2*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated September 16, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014.
10.23*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated June 17, 2015 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 23, 2015.
10.24*
Ventas Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
12
Statement Regarding Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
Filed herewith.
21
Subsidiaries of Ventas, Inc.
Filed herewith.
23
Consent of KPMG LLP.
Filed herewith.
31.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
31.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
32.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
32.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
101
Interactive Data File.
Filed herewith.
________________________
* Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit pursuant to Item 15(b) of Form 10-K.
193
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date:
February 12, 2016
VENTAS, INC.
By:
/s/ DEBRA A. CAFARO
Debra A. Cafaro
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
194
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ DEBRA A. CAFARO
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
February 12, 2016
Debra A. Cafaro
/s/ ROBERT F. PROBST
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
February 12, 2016
Robert F. Probst
/s/ GREGORY R. LIEBBE
Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
February 12, 2016
Gregory R. Liebbe
/s/ MELODY C. BARNES
Director
February 12, 2016
Melody C. Barnes
/s/ DOUGLAS CROCKER II
Director
February 12, 2016
Douglas Crocker II
/s/ JAY M. GELLERT
Director
February 12, 2016
Jay M. Gellert
/s/ RICHARD I. GILCHRIST
Director
February 12, 2016
Richard I. Gilchrist
/s/ MATTHEW J. LUSTIG
Director
February 12, 2016
Matthew J. Lustig
/s/ DOUGLAS M. PASQUALE
Director
February 12, 2016
Douglas M. Pasquale
/s/ ROBERT D. REED
Director
February 12, 2016
Robert D. Reed
/s/ GLENN J. RUFRANO
Director
February 12, 2016
Glenn J. Rufrano
/s/ JAMES D. SHELTON
Director
February 12, 2016
James D. Shelton
195
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
2.1
Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
3.1
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011.
3.2
Fourth Amended and Restated Bylaws, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011.
4.1
Specimen common stock certificate.
Filed herewith.
4.2
Indenture dated as of September 19, 2006 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuer(s), the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.9 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on April 7, 2006, File No. 333-133115.
4.3
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 17, 2011 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.750% Senior Notes due 2021.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 20, 2011.
4.4
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of February 10, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on February 14, 2012.
4.5
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.000% Senior Notes due 2019.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 18, 2012.
4.6
Seventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of August 3, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012.
4.7
Eighth Supplemental Indenture dated as of December 13, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.000% Senior Notes due 2018.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 13, 2012.
4.8
Ninth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 7, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.450% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Registration Statement on Form 8-A, filed on March 7, 2013.
196
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.9
Tenth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 19, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.700% Senior Notes due 2020.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 19, 2013.
4.10
Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.7 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on April 2, 2012, File No. 333-180521.
4.11
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 1.550% Senior Notes due 2016.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 26, 2013.
4.12
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.700% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 26, 2013.
4.13
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2014 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 1.250% Senior Notes due 2017.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 17, 2014.
4.14
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2014 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.750% Senior Notes due 2024.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 17, 2014.
4.15
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.500% Senior Notes due 2025.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015.
4.16
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.375% Senior Notes due 2045.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015.
4.17
Indenture dated as of August 19, 1997 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and The Bank of New York, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on July 25, 1997, File No. 333-32135.
4.18
Indenture dated as of January 13, 1999 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and Chase Manhattan Bank and Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on January 15, 1999, File No. 333-70707.
4.19
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 18, 2005 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 11, 2005, File No. 001-09028.
197
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.20
Indenture dated as September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Canadian Finance Limited, the Guarantors parties thereto from time to time and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.21
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.22
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
4.23
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 13, 2015 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.30% Senior Notes, Series C due 2022.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.24 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
4.24
Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015.
4.25
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes due 2026.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015.
10.1
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to our Registration Statement on Form S-4, as amended, filed on June 19, 2002, File No. 333-89312.
10.2
Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement, dated as of December 9, 2013, among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc. and Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender, L/C Issuer and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 9, 2013.
10.4
Second Amendment and Joinder dated as of October 14, 2015 to that certain Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, Ventas UK Finance, Inc., Ventas Euro Finance, LLC, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc. and Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Swing Line Lender L/C Issuer and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on October 19, 2015.
10.5
Transition Services Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
198
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.6
Tax Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
10.7
Employee Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015.
10.8*
Ventas, Inc. 2004 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
10.9.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.9.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
10.9.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
10.10.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012.
10.10.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.10.3*
Form of Amendment to Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012.
10.10.4*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.11.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 23, 2012.
10.11.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
10.11.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.
10.11.4*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.11.5*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.11.6*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
199
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.12.1*
Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.12.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.13.1*
Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.13.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K fir the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.14.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference to Appendix B to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. definitive Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting, filed on March 24, 2005, File No. 001-09028.
10.14.2*
First Amendment to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan, dated October 28, 2008.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
10.15.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, File No. 001-09028.
10.15.2*
Amendment to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
10.16*
Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and Debra A. Cafaro.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011.
10.17.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of July 31, 1998 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
10.17.2*
Amendment dated as of September 30, 1999 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.2.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
10.17.3*
Amendment dated as of March 19, 2007 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 23, 2007.
10.17.4*
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.17.5*
Amended and Restated Change-in-Control Severance Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011.
10.18*
Consulting Agreement dated December 31, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Richard A. Schweinhart.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 7, 2015.
10.19.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of September 18, 2002 between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002.
200
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.19.2*
Amendment dated as of March 19, 2007 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 23, 2007.
10.19.3*
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and Raymond J. Lewis.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
10.20*
Employment Agreement dated as of June 22, 2010 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
10.21*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated as of October 21, 2013 between Ventas, Inc. and John D. Cobb.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.
10.22.1*
Offer Letter dated September 16, 2014 from Ventas, Inc. to Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014.
10.22.2*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated September 16, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014.
10.23*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated June 17, 2015 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 23, 2015.
10.24*
Ventas Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
12
Statement Regarding Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
Filed herewith.
21
Subsidiaries of Ventas, Inc.
Filed herewith.
23
Consent of KPMG LLP.
Filed herewith.
31.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
31.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
32.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
32.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
101
Interactive Data File.
Filed herewith.
________________________
* Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit pursuant to Item 15(b) of Form 10-K.
201