Chemed - 10-Q quarterly report FY2012 Q2

Washington, D.C. 20549

(Mark One)

Commission File Number: 1-8351

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter periods that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

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).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

As used herein, the terms "We," "Company" and "Chemed" refer to Chemed Corporation or Chemed Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.

We have prepared the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Chemed in accordance with Rule 10-01 of SEC Regulation S-X.  Consequently, we have omitted certain disclosures required under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. The December 31, 2011 balance sheet data were derived from audited financial statements but do not include all disclosures required by GAAP.  However, in our opinion, the financial statements presented herein contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.  These financial statements are prepared on the same basis as and should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

As of June 30, 2012, VITAS has approximately $510,000 in unbilled revenue included in accounts receivable (December 31, 2011 - $720,000).  The unbilled revenue at VITAS relates to hospice programs currently undergoing focused medical reviews (“FMR”).  During FMR, surveyors working on behalf of the U.S. Federal government review certain patient files for compliance with Medicare regulations.  During the time the patient file is under review, we are unable to bill for care provided to those patients.  We make appropriate provisions to reduce our revenue and accounts receivable balance for potential denials of patient service revenue due to FMR activity.

During the three-month period ended June 30, 2012, we did not record any Medicare cap liability.  During the six-month period ended June 30, 2012, we reversed Medicare cap liability for amounts recorded in the fourth quarter of 2011 for three programs’ projected 2012 measurement period liability.  We reversed these amounts as improving admissions trends in these programs indicate that the liability had been eliminated.

Shown below is the Medicare cap liability activity for the periods ended (in thousands):

 

Vitas provides charity care, in certain circumstances, to patients without charge when management of the hospice program determines, at the time services are performed, that the patient does not have the financial wherewithal to make payment. There is no revenue or associated accounts receivable in the accompanying consolidated financial statements related to charity care. The cost of charity care is calculated by taking the ratio of charity care days to total days of care and multiplying by total cost of care. The cost of charity care is as follows (in thousands):

For the three and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012, 1.4 million stock options were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share as their exercise prices were greater than the average market price for most of the period. For the three and six-month period ended June 30, 2011, 970,000 stock options were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share.

Diluted earnings per share may be impacted in the future as the result of the issuance of our 1.875% Senior Convertible Notes (the “Notes”) and related purchased call options and sold warrants.  Per FASB’s authoritative guidance on the effect of contingently convertible instruments on diluted earnings per share and convertible bonds with an issuer option to settle for cash upon conversion, we will not include any shares related to the Notes in our calculation of diluted earnings per share until our average stock price for a quarter exceeds the current conversion price.  We would then include in our diluted earnings per share calculation those shares issuable using the treasury stock method.  The amount of shares issuable is based upon the amount by which the average stock price for the quarter exceeds the conversion price.  The purchased call option does not impact the calculation of diluted earnings per share as it is always anti-dilutive. The sold warrants become dilutive when our average stock price for a quarter exceeds the strike price of the warrant.

The following table provides examples of how changes in our stock price impact the number of shares that would be included in our diluted earnings per share calculation at June 30, 2012.  It also shows the impact on the number of shares issuable upon conversion of the Notes and settlement of the purchased call options and sold warrants:

 

We are in compliance with all debt covenants as of June 30, 2012.  We have issued $29.4 million in standby letters of credit as of June 30, 2012 for insurance purposes.  Issued letters of credit reduce our available credit under the 2011 Credit Agreement.  As of June 30, 2012, we have approximately $320.6 million of unused lines of credit available and eligible to be drawn down under our revolving credit facility, excluding the $150 million expansion feature.

The following amounts are included in our consolidated balance sheet related to the Notes:

The unamortized debt discount is being amortized using the effective interest method over the remaining life of the Notes.  The effective rate on the Notes is approximately 6.875%.

Other income/(expense) -- net comprises the following (in thousands):

VITAS is party to a class action lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, in September 2006 by Bernadette Santos, Keith Knoche and Joyce White.  This case alleges failure to pay overtime and failure to provide meal and rest periods to a purported class of California admissions nurses, chaplains and sales representatives.  The case seeks payment of penalties, interest and Plaintiffs’ attorney fees.  We contest these allegations.  In December 2009, the trial court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.  In July 2011, the Court of Appeals affirmed denial of class certification on the travel time, meal and rest period claims, and reversed the trial court’s denial on the off-the-clock and sales representation exemption claims.  Plaintiffs have filed an appeal of this decision.  We are unable to estimate our potential liability or potential range of loss, if any, with respect to this case.

On January 12, 2012, the Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters Pension Fund filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Company, Kevin McNamara, David Williams, and Timothy O’Toole.  On April 9, 2012, the Court issued orders (a) renaming the suit as In re Chemed Corp. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-28 (S.D. Ohio), (b) appointing the Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters Pension Fund and the Electrical Workers Pension Fund, Local 103, I.B.E.W. as Lead Plaintiffs; and (c) approving Lead Plaintiffs’ selection of Labaton Sucharow LLP and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP as Co-Lead Counsel.  On June 18, 2012, Lead Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint alleging violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 against all Defendants, and violation of Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against Messrs. McNamara, Williams and O’Toole.  The suit’s allegations concern the VITAS hospice segment of the Company’s business.  Lead Plaintiffs seek, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Chemed Capital Stock between February 15, 2010 and November 16, 2011, compensatory damages in an unspecified amount and attorneys’ fees and expenses, arising from Defendants’ failure to disclose an alleged fraudulent scheme to enroll ineligible hospice patients and to fraudulently obtain payments from the federal government.  Defendants are required to move or otherwise respond to the amended complaint on or before August 17, 2012.  Defendants believe the claims are without merit, and intend to defend vigorously against them.

In May 2009, VITAS received an administrative subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice requesting VITAS deliver to the OIG documents, patient records, and policy and procedure manuals for headquarters and its Texas programs concerning hospice services provided for the period January 1, 2003 to the date of the letter.  In August 2009, the OIG selected medical records for 59 past and current patients from a Texas program for review.   In February 2010, VITAS received a companion civil investigative demand (“CID”) from the State of Texas Attorney General’s Office, seeking related documents. In September 2010, it received a second CID and a second administrative subpoena seeking related documents.  In April 2011, the U.S. Attorney provided the Company with a copy of qui tam complaint filed under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.  The Court unsealed this complaint in November 2011.  The U.S. Attorney and the Attorney General for the State of Texas filed a notice in November 2011 that they had decided not to intervene at that time in the case.  They continue to investigate its allegations.  It was brought by Michael Rehfelt, a former VITAS San Antonio program general manager, against VITAS, the program’s former Regional Vice President Keith Becker, its former Medical Director Justos Cisneros, and their current employers:  Wellmed Medical Management, Care Level Management LLC, and Inspiris Inc.  Plaintiff dismissed his case against their current employers in March of 2012.  The case alleges admission and recertification of inappropriate patients, backdating revocations, and conspiring to admit inappropriate patients to hospice.  In June 2011, the U.S. Attorney provided the Company with a partially unsealed second qui tam complaint filed under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.  In June 2011, the U.S. Attorney also provided the Company with a partially unsealed third qui tam complaint filed under seal in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.  We are conferring with the U.S. Attorney regarding the Company’s defenses to each complaint’s allegations.  We can neither predict the outcome of this investigation nor estimate our potential liability, if any.

In April 2005, the OIG served VITAS with civil subpoenas relating to VITAS’ alleged failure to appropriately bill Medicare and Medicaid for hospice services.  As part of this investigation, the OIG selected medical records for 320 past and current patients from VITAS’ three largest programs for review.  It also sought policies and procedures dating back to 1998 covering admissions, certifications, recertifications and discharges.  During the third quarter of 2005 and again in May 2006, the OIG requested additional information from us.  The Court dismissed a related qui tam complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida with prejudice in July 2007.  The plaintiffs appealed this dismissal, which the Court of Appeals affirmed.  The government continues to investigate the complaint’s allegations.  In March 2009, we received a letter from the government reiterating the basis of their investigations.  In July 2012, we received an administrative subpoena from the Office of the Attorney General of Florida seeking documents from January 1, 2007 covering areas including billing, marketing, referrals, incentives, patient eligibility for hospice care, claims submitted to government programs, and VITAS’ financial performance.  We are conferring with the government’s counsel regarding the document requests.  We are unable to estimate the timing or outcome of this investigation or our potential liability, if any, with respect to this matter.

From time to time throughout the year, we invest excess cash in money market funds with major commercial banks. We closely monitor the creditworthiness of the institutions with which we invest our overnight funds.  We had $53.4 million in cash equivalents as of June 30, 2012.  There was $32.5 million in cash equivalents as of December 31, 2011.  The weighted average rate of return for our cash equivalents was 0.2% for June 30, 2012 and 0.1% for December 31, 2011.

For cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable, the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair value because of the liquidity and short-term nature of these instruments.

In the first six months of 2012, we completed three business combinations within our Roto-Rooter segment for $1.5 million in cash to increase our market penetration in Bend, Oregon; Shreveport, Louisiana; and Boise, Idaho.  A substantial portion of this aggregate purchase price was allocated to goodwill.  The operating results of these business combinations have been included in our results of operations since the acquisition date and are not material for the three and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012 nor for the comparable prior year periods.

Our 1.875% Notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed on an unsecured, jointly, and severally liable basis by certain of our 100% owned subsidiaries.  The following unaudited, condensed, consolidating financial data presents the composition of the parent company (Chemed), the guarantor subsidiaries and the non-guarantor subsidiaries as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 for the balance sheet, the three and six months ended June 30, 2012 and June 30, 2011 for the income statement and the six months ended June 30, 2012 and June 30, 2011 for the statement of cash flows (dollars in thousands):