Companies:
10,652
total market cap:
S$178.891 T
Sign In
๐บ๐ธ
EN
English
$ SGD
$
USD
๐บ๐ธ
โฌ
EUR
๐ช๐บ
โน
INR
๐ฎ๐ณ
ยฃ
GBP
๐ฌ๐ง
$
CAD
๐จ๐ฆ
$
AUD
๐ฆ๐บ
$
NZD
๐ณ๐ฟ
$
HKD
๐ญ๐ฐ
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
#681
Rank
S$46.15 B
Marketcap
๐บ๐ธ
United States
Country
S$98.27
Share price
-0.33%
Change (1 day)
18.77%
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 2014
Ventas - 10-K annual report 2014
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, 2014
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.
x
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, computed by reference to the closing price of the common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange as of June 30, 2014, was
$18.8 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, 2015
,
330,809,789
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 14, 2015 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, including investments in different asset types and outside the United States;
•
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 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 capital 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, 2014
and for the year ending December 31,
2015
;
•
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, 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, to accurately estimate our costs in fixed fee-for-service projects 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;
•
Our ability to build, maintain and expand our relationships with existing and prospective hospital and health system clients;
•
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;
•
Merger and acquisition activity in the healthcare and seniors housing 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 and Sunrise 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.
Neither Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) nor Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”) is currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria and Sunrise 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 or Sunrise, 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
24
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
38
Item 2.
Properties
38
Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
40
Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
40
PART II
Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
40
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
43
Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
44
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
186
Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
186
Item 9B.
Other Information
186
PART III
Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
186
Item 11.
Executive Compensation
186
Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
186
Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
186
Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
187
PART IV
Item 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
188
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, 2014
, we owned more than
1,500
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, MOBs, skilled nursing and other facilities, and hospitals, and we had
one
new property 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, 2014
, we leased a total of
922
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
270
seniors housing communities for us pursuant to long-term management agreements.
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 unsecured 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 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
2014
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
•
In 2014, we paid an annual cash dividend on our common stock of
$2.965
per share.
•
During 2014, we made investments totaling approximately
$2.4 billion
in seniors housing and healthcare assets, including 29 seniors housing communities located in Canada that we acquired from Holiday Retirement (the “Holiday Canada Acquisition”), three high-quality private hospitals located in the United Kingdom and 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.
•
In January 2015, we acquired publicly traded American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction (the “HCT Acquisition”), which added 152 properties (some of which are located on the same campus) to our portfolio. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately 28.4 million shares of our common stock, 1.1 million limited partnership units that are redeemable for shares of our common stock, cash and the assumption of debt.
•
In 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately $320 million, including the acquisition of five triple-net leased properties in the United Kingdom and 12 skilled nursing facilities.
•
In April 2014, we issued and sold $700 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes with a weighted average interest rate of 2.75% and a weighted average maturity of seven years.
•
In September 2014, we issued and sold CAD 650.0 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with an effective weighted average interest rate of
3.5%
and a weighted average maturity of
6.9
years, on a private placement basis in Canada. We used the net proceeds from the sale to repay a portion of the CAD 791.0 million unsecured term loan we incurred to initially fund the Holiday Canada Acquisition.
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold $900 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with a weighted average interest rate of 3.8% and a weighted average maturity of 16.7 years, and we issued and sold CAD 250.0 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with an interest rate of 3.3% and a maturity of seven years, on a private placement basis in Canada.
•
Under our “at-the-market” equity offering program, during 2014 and 2015 we issued and sold a total of approximately
7.1 million
shares of our common stock at a weighted average price of
$75.18
per share for aggregate net proceeds (after sales agent commissions) of
$528.1 million
.
•
During 2014, we sold
22
properties for
$118.2 million
and received loans receivable repayments of
$55.9 million
.
•
In 2015, we sold 17 properties for $275.1 million, including $5.5 million of lease termination fees.
•
By the end of 2014, we had re-leased to Kindred, transitioned to new operators or sold 107 of the 108 licensed healthcare assets whose lease terms with Kindred were scheduled to expire on September 30, 2014, and we expect to sell the remaining asset during 2015. See “Triple-Net Lease Expirations.”
2
Portfolio Summary
The following table summarizes our consolidated portfolio of properties and other investments (excluding properties included in discontinued operations during
2014
and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
) as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2014
:
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
746
67,189
$
15,636,077
65.6
%
$
232.7
$2,029,003
66.6
%
MOBs (4)
275
15,246,181
3,766,871
15.8
0.2
438,610
15.4
Skilled nursing and other facilities
365
41,148
3,109,556
13.0
75.6
362,746
11.9
Hospitals
47
3,820
498,441
2.1
130.5
127,975
4.2
Total properties
1,433
23,010,945
96.5
2,958,334
98.1
Loans and investments
829,756
3.5
55,169
1.8
Other
—
—
4,267
0.1
Total
$
23,840,701
100.0
%
$3,017,770
100.0
%
(1)
As of
December 31, 2014
, we also owned
20
seniors housing communities,
17
MOBs and
14
skilled nursing facilities through investments in unconsolidated entities, and we classified
five
seniors housing communities,
nine
skilled nursing facilities, and
36
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
94
unaffiliated healthcare operating companies, including the following publicly traded companies or their subsidiaries: Brookdale (161 properties) (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities); Kindred (
83
properties); 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. (
12
properties); Capital Senior Living Corporation (
12
properties); Spire Healthcare plc (
three
properties); and HealthSouth Corp. (
two
properties).
(2)
Seniors housing communities are measured in units; MOBs are measured by square footage; and skilled nursing and other facilities and hospitals are measured by bed count.
(3)
Total revenues exclude revenues attributable to properties included in discontinued operations during
2014
and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
.
(4)
As of
December 31, 2014
, we leased
30
of our consolidated MOBs pursuant to triple-net leases, Lillibridge or PMBRES managed
246
of our consolidated MOBs and
29
of our consolidated MOBs were managed by
nine
unaffiliated managers. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we also provided management and leasing services for
75
MOBs owned by third parties as of
December 31, 2014
.
Seniors Housing and Healthcare Properties
As of
December 31, 2014
, we owned a total of
1,484
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
731
15
20
766
MOBs
247
28
17
292
Skilled nursing and other facilities
359
6
14
379
Hospitals
46
1
—
47
Total
1,383
50
51
1,484
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
3
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, 2014
, we owned or managed for third parties approximately 21 million square feet of MOBs that are predominantly located on or near an acute care hospital campus (“on campus”).
Skilled Nursing and Other 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.
Our personal care facilities provide specialized care, including supported living services, neurorehabilitation, neurobehavioral management and vocational programs, for persons with acquired or traumatic brain injury.
Hospitals
Substantially all of our hospitals are operated as long-term acute care hospitals, which 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 hospitals 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 long-term acute care hospitals are freestanding facilities, and we do not own any “hospitals within hospitals.” We also own two hospitals focused on providing children’s care and five rehabilitation hospitals devoted to the rehabilitation of patients with various neurological, musculoskeletal, orthopedic and other medical conditions following stabilization of their acute medical issues.
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 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, 2014
.
4
The following table shows our rental income and resident fees and services by geographic location for the year ended
December 31, 2014
:
Rental Income and
Resident Fees and
Services (1)
Percent of Total
Revenues (1)
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
462,467
15.0
%
New York
295,783
9.6
Texas
213,094
6.9
Illinois
139,138
4.5
Florida
124,374
4.0
Massachusetts
114,076
3.7
Pennsylvania
109,452
3.6
North Carolina
90,186
2.9
Colorado
89,555
2.9
New Jersey
89,275
2.9
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
1,119,438
36.5
Total U.S
2,846,838
92.5
%
Canada (seven provinces)
126,321
4.1
United Kingdom
13,787
0.5
Total
$
2,986,946
97.1
%
(2)
(1)
This presentation excludes revenues from properties included in discontinued operations during
2014
.
(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, 2014
:
NOI (1)
Percent of Total
NOI (1)
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
255,427
13.7
%
Texas
148,418
8.0
New York
125,707
6.8
Illinois
87,742
4.7
Florida
83,693
4.5
Massachusetts
73,847
4.0
Indiana
62,642
3.4
North Carolina
62,349
3.4
Pennsylvania
55,125
3.0
Ohio
52,317
2.8
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
774,613
41.6
Total U.S
1,781,880
95.9
%
Canada (seven provinces)
63,622
3.4
United Kingdom
13,787
0.7
Total
$
1,859,289
100.0
%
(1)
This presentation excludes NOI from properties included in discontinued operations during
2014
.
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, 2014
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
65.5
%
42.3
%
59.2
%
States without CON requirements
34.5
57.7
40.8
Total
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Loans and Investments
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$927.7 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, 2014
, we had
one
new property 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, 2014
(excluding properties included in discontinued operations during 2014 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
270
36.0
%
50.6
%
27.8
%
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
160
10.2
5.5
9.2
Kindred
83
2.1
6.2
10.2
(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 and Kindred 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 these leases has guaranty and cross-default provisions tied to other leases with the same tenant or its affiliates, as well as bundled lease renewals (as described in more detail below).
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the year ended
December 31, 2014
. If either Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred 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.
7
Brookdale Senior Living Leases
As of
December 31, 2014
, after giving effect to Brookdale Senior Living’s acquisition of Emeritus Senior Living on July 31, 2014, we leased
160
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, 2014
, the aggregate 2015 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
$186.8 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
$182.5 million
(in each case, excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities as of
December 31, 2014
). 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, 2014
, we leased
83
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.
As of December 31, 2014, we had re-leased to Kindred, transitioned to new operators or sold 107 of the 108 licensed healthcare assets whose lease terms were scheduled to expire on September 30, 2014. We expect to sell the remaining asset during 2015; however, the transaction remains subject to customary due diligence conditions, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully complete the sale on a timely basis or at all.
In December 2014, we entered into favorable agreements with Kindred to transition the operations of nine licensed healthcare assets, make certain 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 will be 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, and Kindred has extensive and detailed obligations to cooperate and ensure an orderly transition of the properties to another operator.
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2014
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
269
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 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. For the year ended
December 31, 2014
, the management fees (including incentive fees) we paid pursuant to our Sunrise management agreements were equal to
6.5%
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,
8
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, 2014
, we had
479
employees, including
299
employees associated with our MOB operations reportable business segment, but excluding
1,261
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—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.
9
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
For the year ended
December 31, 2014
, approximately
16%
of our total revenues and
26%
of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were attributable to skilled nursing and other 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 facilities.
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 must be licensed on an annual or biannual basis and certified annually 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 nursing care provided by the operator, qualifications of the operator’s administrative personnel and nursing staff, adequacy of the physical plant and equipment and continuing compliance with laws and regulations governing the operation of skilled nursing facilities. The failure to maintain or renew any required license or regulatory approval or to correct serious deficiencies identified in a compliance survey could prevent an operator from continuing operations at a property, and a loss of licensure or certification could adversely affect a skilled nursing facility operator’s ability to receive payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which, in turn, could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
The operators of our hospitals must meet the applicable conditions of participation established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and comply with state and local laws and regulations in order to receive Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. Such conditions relate to the type of hospital and its equipment, personnel and standard of medical care, and hospital operators must undergo periodic on-site licensure surveys, which generally are limited if the hospital is accredited by The Joint Commission (formerly the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations) or other recognized accreditation organizations. A loss of licensure or certification could adversely affect a hospital operator’s ability to receive payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which, in turn, could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
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 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
11
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. Similarly, 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.
Fraud and Abuse Enforcement
Federal and state laws and regulations prohibit a wide variety of fraud and abuse by healthcare providers who participate in, receive payments from or make or receive referrals for work in connection with government-funded healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. These federal laws include, among others:
•
The anti-kickback statute (Section 1128B(b) of the Social Security Act), which prohibits certain business practices and relationships, including the payment, receipt or solicitation of any remuneration, directly or indirectly, to induce a referral of any patient or service or item covered by a federal health care program, including Medicare, or a state health program, such as Medicaid;
•
The physician self-referral prohibition (Ethics in Patient Referrals Act of 1989, commonly referred to as the “Stark Law”), which prohibits referrals by physicians of Medicare or Medicaid patients to providers of a broad range of designated healthcare services with which the physicians (or their immediate family members) have ownership interests or certain other financial arrangements;
•
The False Claims Act, which prohibits any person from knowingly presenting false or fraudulent claims for payment by the federal government (including the Medicare and Medicaid programs);
•
The Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which authorizes HHS to impose civil penalties administratively for fraudulent acts; and
•
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (commonly referred to as “HIPAA”), which among other things, protects the privacy and security of individually identifiable health information by limiting its use and disclosure.
Sanctions for violating these federal laws include 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. These laws also impose an affirmative duty on operators to ensure that they do not employ or contract with persons excluded from the Medicare and other governmental healthcare programs.
Many states have adopted or are considering legislative proposals similar to the federal anti-fraud and abuse laws, some of which extend beyond the Medicare and Medicaid programs, to prohibit the payment or receipt of remuneration for the referral of patients and physician self-referrals, regardless of whether the service was reimbursed by Medicare or Medicaid. Many states have also adopted or are considering legislative proposals to increase patient protections, such as minimum staffing levels, criminal background checks, and limiting the use and disclosure of patient specific health information. These state laws also impose criminal and civil penalties similar to the federal laws.
In the ordinary course of their business, the operators of our properties have been and are subject regularly to inquiries, investigations and audits by federal and state agencies that oversee applicable laws and regulations. Increased funding through recent federal and state legislation and the creation of a series of new healthcare crimes by HIPAA have led to a significant expansion in the number and scope of investigations and enforcement actions over the past several years. Private enforcement of healthcare fraud has also increased, due in large part to amendments to the civil False Claims Act in 1986 that were designed to encourage private individuals to sue on behalf of the government. These whistleblower suits by private individuals, known as qui tam suits, may be filed by almost anyone, including present and former patients or nurses and other employees.
As federal and state budget pressures persist, administrative agencies may continue to escalate their investigation and enforcement efforts to eliminate waste and control fraud and abuse in governmental healthcare programs. 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.
12
Reimbursement
In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, along with a reconciliation measure, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”). The passage of the Affordable Care Act has resulted in comprehensive reform legislation that is expected to expand health care coverage to millions of currently uninsured people beginning in 2014. To help fund this expansion, the Affordable Care Act outlines certain reductions in Medicare reimbursement rates for various healthcare providers, including long-term acute care hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, as well as certain other changes to Medicare payment methodologies.
The Affordable Care Act, among other things, reduced the inflationary market basket increase included in standard federal payment rates for long-term acute care hospitals by 25 basis points in fiscal year 2010, 50 basis points in fiscal year 2011, 10 basis points in fiscal years 2012 and 2013, 30 basis points in fiscal year 2014, 20 basis points in fiscal years 2015 and 2016, and 75 basis points in fiscal years 2017 through 2019. In addition, under the Affordable Care Act, long-term acute care hospitals and skilled nursing facilities are subject to a rate adjustment to the annual market basket increase to reflect improvements in productivity. In July 2012, after considering the constitutionality of various provisions of the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the so-called individual mandate and, while it found the provisions expanding Medicaid eligibility unconstitutional, determined that the issue was appropriately remedied by circumscribing the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ enforcement authority, thus leaving the Medicaid expansion intact.
Healthcare is one of the largest industries in the United States and continues to attract a great deal of legislative interest and public attention. We cannot assure you that existing or future healthcare reform legislation or changes in the administration or implementation of governmental and non-governmental healthcare reimbursement programs will not have a material adverse effect on our operators’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations, or on their ability to satisfy their obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
In August 2011, President Obama and the U.S. Congress enacted the Budget Control Act of 2011 (the “Budget Control Act”) to increase the federal government’s borrowing authority (the so-called “debt ceiling”) and reduce the federal government’s projected operating deficit. Under the Budget Control Act, a 2% reduction in Medicare payments to long-term acute care hospitals and skilled nursing facilities (part of $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts commonly referred to as “sequestration”) was expected to take effect on February 1, 2013. Although delayed by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, this 2% reduction became effective on April 1, 2013. These measures or any future federal legislation relating to the debt ceiling or deficit reduction could have a material adverse effect on our operators’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations and their ability to satisfy their obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
In October 2014, President Obama signed into law The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Transformation Act of 2014 (the “IMPACT Act”), which standardizes patient assessments among post-acute care providers (home health providers, skilled nursing facilities, long-term care hospitals and rehabilitation providers) and is designed to to give Congress the data needed for major payment reforms, such as site-neutral and bundled payments, in the future. We have not yet determined the effect, if any, that the IMPACT Act may have on our operators or on us.
Medicare Reimbursement; Long-Term Acute Care Hospitals
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (“BBA”) mandated the creation of a prospective payment system for long-term acute care hospitals (“LTAC PPS”) for cost reporting periods commencing on or after October 1, 2002. LTAC PPS requires payment for a Medicare beneficiary at a predetermined, per discharge amount for each defined patient category (called “Long-Term Care—Diagnosis Related Groups” or “LTC-DRGs”), adjusted for differences in area wage levels. Updates to LTAC PPS payment rates are established by regulators and published annually for the long-term acute care hospital rate year, which coincides with annual updates to the LTC-DRG classification system and corresponds to the federal fiscal year (October 1 through September 30).
The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (Pub. L. No. 110-173) (the “Medicare Extension Act”) significantly expanded medical necessity reviews by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) by requiring long-term acute care hospitals to institute a patient review process to better assess patients upon admission and on a continuing basis for appropriateness of care. In addition, the Medicare Extension Act, among other things, provided the following long-term acute care hospital payment policy changes for a period of three years, all of which were extended for two additional years by the Affordable Care Act:
•
Prevention of the application of the “25-percent rule,” which limits payments from referring co-located hospitals, to freestanding and grandfathered long-term acute care hospitals;
•
Modification of the application of the 25-percent rule to certain urban and rural long-term acute care “hospitals-within-hospitals” and “satellite” facilities;
13
•
Prevention of the application of the “very short stay outlier” policy; and
•
Prevention of any one-time adjustments to correct estimates used in implementing LTAC PPS.
Lastly, the Medicare Extension Act introduced a moratorium on new long-term acute care hospitals and beds for three years, which was subsequently extended by the Affordable Care Act and expired on December 29, 2012. In its May 2008 final rule, CMS delayed the extension of the 25-percent rule to freestanding and grandfathered long-term acute care hospitals and increased the patient percentage thresholds for certain urban and rural long-term acute care “hospitals-within-hospitals” and “satellite” facilities for three years, as mandated by the Medicare Extension Act, and set forth policies on implementing the moratorium on new long-term acute care hospitals and beds imposed by the Medicare Extension Act.
In its August 2009 final rule, CMS finalized policies to implement changes required by Section 124 of the Medicare Improvements for Patients & Providers Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-275), continuing reforms intended to improve the accuracy of Medicare payments for inpatient acute care through the severity-adjusted diagnosis-related group (MS-LTC-DRG) classification system for long-term acute care hospitals.
In its August 2012 final rule, CMS delayed the extension of the 25-percent rule to freestanding and grandfathered long-term acute care hospitals for another year until December 29, 2013.
On December 26, 2013, President Obama signed into law the Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013 (the “Pathway for SGR Reform Act”), which prevented a scheduled cut to the Medicare Part B physician fee schedules from taking effect on January 1, 2014. Also known as the “doc fix,” this reprieve from the Medicare payment cut was effective for a period of 90 days (until March 31, 2014), while Congress worked to find a permanent solution, and included several provisions impacting payments to long-term acute care hospitals. Among other things, the Pathway for SGR Reform Act established new patient criteria for long-term acute care hospitals to receive reimbursement for services to Medicare beneficiaries at the LTAC PPS rate, rather than the acute inpatient prospective payment system (“IPPS”) rate, and required CMS to establish a process for a long-term acute care hospital subject to the IPPS payment rate to re-qualify for payment under LTAC PPS. The Pathway for SGR Reform Act also delayed full implementation of the 25-percent rule for three years, through fiscal year 2017, and extended the current moratorium on establishing or increasing long-term acute care beds (with certain exceptions) through September 30, 2017.
On August 4, 2014, CMS released its final rule updating LTAC PPS for the 2015 fiscal year (October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015). Under the final rule, the LTAC PPS standard federal payment rate will increase by 2.2% in fiscal year 2015, reflecting a 2.9% increase in the market basket index, less both a 0.5% productivity adjustment and a 0.2% adjustment mandated by the Affordable Care Act. After taking into account the last year of the three-year phase in of the permanent one-time budget neutrality adjustment (-1.3%), the LTAC PPS standard federal payment rate in fiscal year 2015 will increase under the final rule by slightly more than 1% over the rate for fiscal year 2014. In addition, the final rule provides for: the retroactive reinstatement and extension, for an additional four years, of the moratorium on the full implementation of the 25-percent rule to freestanding and grandfathered long-term acute care hospitals established under the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 and amended by subsequent legislation; and implementation of the moratorium on the establishment of new long-term acute care hospitals and satellite facilities and the moratorium on bed increases in long-term acute care hospitals under the Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013, as amended by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, effective for the period beginning April 1, 2014 and ending September 30, 2017. CMS estimates that net payments to long-term acute care hospitals under the final rule will increase by approximately $62 million, or 1.1%, in fiscal year 2015 due to the update to the standard federal payment rate, changes to the area wage adjustment and expected changes to short-stay and high-cost outlier payments. However, after taking into account the reinstatement of the moratorium on the implementation of the 25-percent rule, the implementation of the moratoria on the development of new long-term acute care hospitals and satellite facilities and additional beds, and the impact of certain other policy changes, CMS estimates that net payments to long-term acute care hospitals under the final rule will increase by approximately $178 million in fiscal year 2015 relative to fiscal year 2014.
We regularly assess the financial implications of CMS’s rules and other federal legislation on the operators of our long-term acute care hospitals, but we cannot assure you that current rules or future updates to LTAC PPS, LTC-DRGs or Medicare reimbursement for long-term acute care hospitals will not materially adversely affect our operators, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—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.
Medicare Reimbursement; Skilled Nursing Facilities
The BBA also mandated the creation of a prospective payment system for skilled nursing facilities (“SNF PPS”) offering Part A covered services. Under SNF PPS, payment amounts are based upon classifications determined through assessments of individual Medicare patients in the skilled nursing facility, rather than on the facility’s reasonable costs. SNF PPS payments,
14
which are made on a per diem basis for each resident, are generally intended to cover all inpatient services for Medicare patients, including routine nursing care, most capital-related costs associated with the inpatient stay and ancillary services, such as respiratory therapy, occupational and physical therapy, speech therapy and certain covered drugs.
In response to widespread healthcare industry concern about the reductions in payments under the BBA, the federal government enacted the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (“BBRA”). The BBRA increased the per diem reimbursement rates for certain high acuity patients by 20% from April 1, 2000 until CMS refined the resource utilization groups (“RUGs”) used to determine the daily payment for beneficiaries in skilled nursing facilities in the 2006 fiscal year. The BBRA also imposed a two-year moratorium on the annual cap mandated by the BBA on physical, occupational and speech therapy services provided to a patient by outpatient rehabilitation therapy providers, including Part B covered therapy services in nursing facilities. Although extended multiple times by Congress, relief from the BBA therapy caps expired on December 31, 2009.
Under its final rule updating LTC-DRGs for the 2007 fiscal year, CMS reduced reimbursement of uncollectible Medicare coinsurance amounts for all beneficiaries (other than beneficiaries of both Medicare and Medicaid) from 100% to 70% for skilled nursing facility cost reporting periods beginning on or after October 1, 2005 and set forth various options for classifying and weighting patients transferred to a skilled nursing facility after a hospital stay less than the mean length of stay associated with that particular diagnosis-related group.
Under its final rule updating SNF PPS for the 2010 fiscal year, CMS recalibrated the case-mix indexes for RUGs used to determine the daily payment for beneficiaries in skilled nursing facilities and implemented the RUG-IV classification model for skilled nursing facilities for the 2011 fiscal year. However, the Affordable Care Act delayed the implementation of RUG-IV for one year, and CMS subsequently modified the implementation schedule in its notice updating SNF PPS for the 2011 fiscal year.
In its final rule updating the Medicare physician fee schedule for the 2012 calendar year, CMS set a $1,880 cap on physical therapy and speech-language pathology services and a separate $1,880 cap on occupational therapy services, including therapy provided in skilled nursing facilities, both without an exceptions process. However, in January 2013, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L. No. 112-96) was enacted to lift the caps on therapy services and require a manual review process for those exceptions for which the beneficiary therapy services exceed $3,700 in a year. The Pathway for SGR Reform Act maintained the status quo for outpatient therapy services by extending the exceptions process for outpatient therapy caps through March 31, 2014.
On August 4, 2014, CMS released its final rule updating SNF PPS for the 2015 fiscal year (October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015). Under the final rule, the SNF PPS standard federal payment rate will increase by 2.0% in fiscal year 2015, reflecting a 2.5% increase in the market basket index, less a 0.5% productivity adjustment mandated by the Affordable Care Act. CMS estimates that net payments to skilled nursing facilities as a result of the final rule will increase by approximately $750 million in fiscal year 2015.
We regularly assess the financial implications of CMS’s rules and other federal legislation on the operators of our skilled nursing facilities, but we cannot assure you that current rules or future updates to SNF PPS, therapy services or Medicare reimbursement for skilled nursing facilities will not materially adversely affect our operators, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—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.
Medicaid Reimbursement; Skilled Nursing Facilities
Approximately two-thirds of all skilled nursing facility residents are dependent on Medicaid. Medicaid reimbursement rates, however, typically are less than the amounts charged by the operators of our skilled nursing facilities. Although the federal government and the states share responsibility for financing Medicaid, states have a wide range of discretion, within certain federal guidelines, to determine eligibility and reimbursement methodology. In addition, federal legislation limits an operator’s ability to withdraw from the Medicaid program by restricting the eviction or transfer of Medicaid residents. As state budget pressures continue to escalate and in an effort to address actual or potential budget shortfalls, many state legislatures have enacted or proposed reductions to Medicaid expenditures by implementing “freezes” or cuts in Medicaid rates paid to providers, including hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, or by restricting eligibility and benefits.
In the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. No. 109 171), Congress made changes to the Medicaid program that were estimated to result in $10 billion in savings to the federal government over the five years following enactment of the legislation, primarily through the accounting practices some states use to calculate their matched payments and revising the qualifications for individuals who are eligible for Medicaid benefits. The changes made by CMS’s final rule updating SNF PPS for the 2006 fiscal year were also anticipated to reduce Medicaid payments to skilled nursing facility operators, and as part of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (Pub. L. No. 109-432), Congress reduced the ceiling on taxes that states may impose on healthcare
15
providers and that would qualify for federal financial participation under Medicaid by 0.5%, from 6% to 5.5%, until October 1, 2011. However, it was anticipated that this reduction would have a negligible effect, impacting only those states with taxes in excess of 5.5%.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. No. 111-5) (the “Recovery Act”), in contrast, temporarily increased federal payments to state Medicaid programs by $86.6 billion through, among other things, a 6.2% increase in the federal share of Medicaid expenditures across the board, with additional funds available depending on a state’s federal medical assistance percentage and unemployment rate. Though the Medicaid federal assistance payments were originally expected to expire on December 31, 2010, the President’s fiscal year 2011 budget extended those payments through June 30, 2011. The Recovery Act also requires states to promptly pay nursing facilities under their Medicaid program, and precludes states, as a condition of receiving the additional funding, from heightening their Medicaid eligibility requirements.
We expect more states to adopt significant Medicaid rate freezes or cuts or other program changes as their reimbursement methodologies continue to evolve. In addition, the U.S. government may revoke, reduce or stop approving “provider taxes” that have the effect of increasing Medicaid payments to the states. We cannot predict the impact that any such actions would have on our skilled nursing facility operators, nor can we assure you that payments under Medicaid are now or in the future will be sufficient to fully reimburse those operators for the cost of providing skilled nursing services. Severe and widespread Medicaid rate cuts or freezes could materially adversely affect our skilled nursing facility operators, which, in turn, could adversely affect their ability to satisfy their contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
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. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—Our leases with Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred generate a meaningful portion of our revenues and operating income; Any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred 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.
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
2014
and do not expect that we will be required to make any such material capital expenditures during
2015
.
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.
16
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 ten-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.
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
17
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 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) 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.
In addition, no more than 25% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of taxable REIT subsidiaries (the “25% TRS test”).
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.
18
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.
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, 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
19
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, 2014
. Although we intend to satisfy the annual distribution requirements to continue to qualify as a REIT for the year ending December 31,
2015
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.
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.
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. 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 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.
20
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.
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
21
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 5% 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 5% 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 5% 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.
If a Non-U.S. Stockholder does not own more than 5% 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 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 Five 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 “Five 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 5% 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 Five 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. 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.
22
If we do not constitute a domestically controlled REIT, a Five 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).
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, 2016 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.
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
23
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.
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, 2014
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, managed
269
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 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred account for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI, and because our leases with Brookdale Senior Living and the Kindred Master Leases are triple-net leases, we depend on Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, any failure by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred 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
24
properties, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred 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 and Kindred 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.
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
269
of our seniors housing communities as of December 31, 2014. 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
25
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, 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 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.
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.
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
26
relationships with current and prospective clients, our ability to obtain debt and equity capital at costs comparable to or better than our competitors, and our ability to negotiate favorable terms with property owners seeking to sell and other contractual counterparties. Our competitors for these opportunities 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 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.
27
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 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.
We expect to incur substantial expenses related to our acquisition of HCT.
The HCT Acquisition was completed in January 2015. We may incur substantial expenses in connection with integrating HCT’s business, operations, networks, systems, technologies, policies and procedures with ours. While we expect to incur a certain level of integration expenses, factors beyond our control could affect the total amount or the timing of integration expenses. Many of the expenses that will be incurred, by their nature, are difficult to estimate accurately. As a result, the integration expenses associated with the HCT Acquisition could, particularly in the near term, exceed any savings that we expect to achieve from the elimination of duplicative expenses and the realization of economies of scale and cost savings related to the integration of the businesses.
Our future results will suffer if we do not effectively manage our expanded portfolio and operations following the acquisition of HCT.
As a result of the HCT Acquisition, we have an expanded portfolio and operations and likely will continue to expand operations through additional acquisitions and other strategic transactions, some of which may involve complex challenges. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to manage our expansion opportunities, integrate new operations into our existing business in an efficient and timely manner, successfully monitor our operations, costs, regulatory compliance and service quality, and maintain other necessary internal controls. It is possible that our expansion or acquisition opportunities will not be successful. It is also possible that we will not realize expected operating efficiencies, cost savings, revenue enhancements, synergies or other benefits.
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 and MOB operating assets 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
28
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 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 on foreign earnings and cash;
•
Foreign ownership restrictions with respect to operations in countries;
•
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 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. 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.
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
29
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. 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 and Kindred. 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.
30
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.
Certain of our tenants and operators rely on reimbursement from third-party payors, including the Medicare 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 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.
We may not be able to maintain or expand our relationships with our existing and future hospital and health system clients.
The success of our MOB operations depends, to a large extent, on our past, current and future relationships with hospitals and their affiliated health systems. We invest significant amounts of time in developing our relationships with both new and existing clients, and these relationships have helped us to secure acquisition and development opportunities, as well as other advisory, property management and hospital project management projects. If our relationships with hospitals and their affiliated health systems deteriorate, or if a conflict of interest or non-compete arrangement prevents us from expanding these relationships, our ability to secure new acquisition and development opportunities or other advisory, property management and hospital project management projects could be impaired and our professional reputation within the industry could be damaged.
Our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken on a fee-for-service basis or 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;
31
•
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.
In MOB development projects that we undertake on a fee-for-service basis, we generally construct properties for clients in exchange for a fixed fee, which creates additional risks such as the inability to pass on increased labor and construction material costs to our clients, development and construction delays that could give our counterparties the right to receive penalties from us, and bankruptcy or default by our contractors. We attempt to mitigate these risks by establishing certain limits on our obligations, shifting some of the risk to the general contractor or seeking other legal protections, but we cannot assure you that our mitigation efforts will be effective. In connection with these projects, we provide engineering, construction and architectural services, and any design, construction or systems failures related to the properties we develop could result in substantial injury or damage to 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 fund the difference and 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.
If any of the risks described above occur, our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken on a fee-for-service basis or through our joint ventures, may not yield anticipated returns, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
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, 2014
, we owned
28
MOBs,
15
seniors housing communities,
six
skilled nursing facilities and
one
hospital through consolidated joint ventures, and we had ownership interests ranging between
5%
and
25%
in
17
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 as of
December 31, 2014
. 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
32
•
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. Substantially all 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.
Termination of resident lease agreements in our seniors housing communities could adversely affect our revenues and earnings.
State regulations generally require assisted living communities to have a written lease agreement with each resident that permits the resident to terminate his or her lease for any reason on reasonable notice, unlike typical apartment lease agreements that have initial terms of one year or longer. Consistent with these regulations, the managers of our seniors housing communities generally enter into resident lease agreements that allow residents to terminate their lease agreements on 30 days’ notice. Due to these lease termination rights and the advanced age of the residents, the resident turnover rate in our seniors housing communities may be difficult to predict. If a large number of resident lease agreements terminate at or around the same time, and if the affected units remain unoccupied, our revenues and earnings could be adversely affected, 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.
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.
33
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 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.
34
Volatility or disruption in the capital markets could prevent our counterparties from satisfying their obligations to us.
Interest rate fluctuations, financial market volatility or credit market disruptions could limit the ability of our tenants, operators and managers to obtain capital to finance their businesses on acceptable terms, which could adversely affect their ability to satisfy their obligations to us. In addition, any difficulty in accessing capital or other financing sources experienced by our other counterparties, such as letters of credit issuers, insurance carriers, banking institutions, title companies and escrow agents, could prevent those counterparties from remaining viable entities or satisfying their obligations to us, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
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 control over financial reporting 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, 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, 2014
, approximately
37.7%
of our total NOI (excluding amounts in discontinued operations) was derived from properties located in
California
(
13.7%
),
Texas
(
8.0%
),
New York
(
6.8%
),
Illinois
(
4.7%
), and
Florida
(
4.5%
). 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.
Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure
We may become more leveraged.
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had approximately
$10.9 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;
35
•
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 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.
36
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 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.
37
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, 2014
, we owned more than 1,500 properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, MOBs, skilled nursing and other facilities, and hospitals, and we had
one
new property 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, 2014
, we had
$2.3 billion
aggregate principal amount of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding, secured by
178
of our properties. Excluding those portions attributed to our joint venture and operating partners, our share of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding was
$2.2 billion
.
38
The following table provides additional information regarding the geographic diversification of our portfolio of properties as of
December 31, 2014
(including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities, but excluding properties classified as held for sale):
Seniors Housing
Communities
Skilled Nursing and Other
Facilities
MOBs
Hospitals
Geographic Location
Number of
Properties
Units
Number of Properties
Licensed
Beds
Number of Properties
Square Feet
Number of Properties
Licensed Beds
Alabama
7
435
2
329
4
468,887
—
—
Arizona
26
2,378
2
232
11
773,109
3
169
Arkansas
4
286
8
875
—
—
—
—
California
85
9,734
9
1,115
24
1,970,387
7
530
Colorado
19
1,742
4
460
12
828,693
1
68
Connecticut
14
1,626
4
432
—
—
—
—
District of Columbia
—
—
—
—
2
101,580
—
—
Florida
46
4,493
1
171
14
315,405
6
511
Georgia
12
1,217
5
620
14
1,152,857
—
—
Idaho
1
70
7
624
—
—
—
—
Illinois
17
2,606
1
82
30
1,109,898
4
430
Indiana
16
1,235
34
3,782
15
947,857
1
59
Kansas
12
724
4
325
—
—
—
—
Kentucky
10
910
29
3,273
4
172,977
2
424
Louisiana
1
58
—
—
4
343,223
1
168
Maine
6
879
8
654
—
—
—
—
Maryland
5
360
3
445
2
82,663
—
—
Massachusetts
20
2,176
42
4,882
—
—
2
109
Michigan
24
1,642
1
330
10
414,518
—
—
Minnesota
18
1,041
3
466
3
243,098
—
—
Mississippi
1
52
—
—
1
50,575
—
—
Missouri
1
87
12
1,086
19
1,053,579
2
227
Montana
2
189
2
276
—
—
—
—
Nebraska
1
135
—
—
—
—
—
—
Nevada
6
611
3
299
2
149,248
1
52
New Hampshire
1
125
3
502
—
—
—
—
New Jersey
14
1,241
1
153
—
—
—
—
New Mexico
4
482
—
—
—
—
1
61
New York
42
4,684
9
1,566
1
111,634
—
—
North Carolina
22
2,179
17
1,876
18
797,628
1
124
North Dakota
1
48
—
—
—
—
—
—
Ohio
26
1,753
20
2,624
28
1,221,020
1
50
Oklahoma
8
431
—
—
—
—
1
59
Oregon
24
2,528
14
1,112
1
105,375
—
—
Pennsylvania
32
2,351
7
934
7
565,562
2
115
Rhode Island
6
648
1
129
—
—
—
—
South Carolina
4
340
4
602
18
1,012,959
—
—
South Dakota
4
182
2
246
—
—
—
—
Tennessee
20
1,575
5
601
10
381,234
1
49
Texas
58
4,942
51
5,375
13
1,032,552
10
615
Utah
4
501
5
476
—
—
—
—
Vermont
—
—
1
144
—
—
—
—
Virginia
8
655
9
1,323
3
126,500
—
—
Washington
21
2,183
18
1,788
10
578,975
—
—
West Virginia
2
124
4
326
—
—
—
—
Wisconsin
68
2,932
17
1,968
12
482,093
—
—
Wyoming
2
168
4
371
—
—
—
—
Total U.S.
725
64,758
376
42,874
292
16,594,086
47
3,820
Canada
41
4,478
—
—
—
—
—
—
United Kingdom
—
—
3
121
—
—
—
—
Total
766
69,236
379
42,995
292
16,594,086
47
3,820
39
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.
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
2013
First Quarter
$
73.20
$
64.68
$
0.67
Second Quarter
82.93
64.38
0.67
Third Quarter
72.16
58.86
0.67
Fourth Quarter
67.33
55.26
0.725
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
As of
February 10, 2015
, we had
330,809,789
shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately
5,284
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. In connection with the HCT Acquisition, on January 5, 2015, our Board of Directors declared a prorated first quarter dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.2107 per share, which was paid in cash on January 27, 2015 to stockholders of record on January 15, 2015. On
February 13, 2015
, our Board of Directors declared another prorated dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.5793 per share, payable in cash on
March 31, 2015
to stockholders of record on
March 6, 2015
. Together, these two prorated amounts equate to the first quarterly installment of our 2015 dividend of $0.79 per share.
40
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
2015
. 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.
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, 2014
:
Number of Shares
Repurchased (1)
Average Price
Per Share
October 1 through October 31
—
$
—
November 1 through November 30
988
$
61.50
December 1 through December 31
7,125
$
71.70
(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 November 14, 2014, we issued 92,993 shares of our common stock to Sarah M. Jensen as consideration for our acquisition of all of the outstanding shares of Jensen Construction Management, Inc. (“Jensen Construction”). In connection with the acquisition, we entered into waiver and release agreements with two Jensen Construction employees pursuant to which we issued 53,469 shares and 1,779 shares, respectively, of our common stock to those employees in exchange for, and in full satisfaction of, any right, interest, ownership or claim that they may have had with respect to any interest in, or securities or assets of, Jensen Construction. The shares of our common stock were issued in reliance on the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act and Rule 506(b) promulgated thereunder.
41
On December 1, 2014, NHP/PMB L.P. (“NHP/PMB”), a limited partnership in which we own a majority interest, issued 383,062 Class A limited partnership units (“OP Units”) in connection with the contribution of an MOB to NHP/PMB. At any time following the first anniversary of their issuance, the OP Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for cash or, at our option, 0.7866 shares of our common stock per unit, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. The OP 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.
Stock Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the cumulative total return (including dividends) to the holders of our common stock from
December 31, 2009
through
December 31, 2014
, 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, 2009
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.
12/31/2009
12/31/2010
12/31/2011
12/31/2012
12/31/2013
12/31/2014
Ventas
$100
$125.41
$137.67
$168.38
$155.51
$203.61
NYSE Composite Index
$100
$113.76
$109.70
$127.54
$161.21
$172.27
Composite REIT Index
$100
$127.56
$136.88
$163.89
$167.72
$213.39
S&P 500 Index
$100
$115.06
$117.48
$136.27
$180.39
$205.07
42
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,
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Operating Data
Rental income
$
1,433,995
$
1,327,383
$
1,180,731
$
795,214
$
518,616
Resident fees and services
1,552,951
1,406,005
1,227,124
865,800
445,157
Interest expense
376,842
334,909
288,717
224,344
170,133
Property-level operating expenses
1,195,098
1,109,632
966,422
645,082
314,985
General, administrative and professional fees
121,746
115,106
98,510
74,537
49,830
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
473,661
489,788
308,814
362,900
212,284
Discontinued operations
2,106
(36,279
)
53,986
1,593
33,883
Net income attributable to common stockholders
475,767
453,509
362,800
364,493
246,167
Per Share Data
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions:
Basic
$
1.61
$
1.67
$
1.06
$
1.59
$
1.35
Diluted
$
1.59
$
1.66
$
1.05
$
1.57
$
1.35
Net income attributable to common stockholders:
Basic
$
1.62
$
1.55
$
1.24
$
1.60
$
1.57
Diluted
$
1.60
$
1.54
$
1.23
$
1.58
$
1.56
Dividends declared per common share
$
2.965
$
2.735
$
2.48
$
2.30
$
2.14
Other Data
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
1,254,845
$
1,194,755
$
992,816
$
773,197
$
447,622
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
(2,169,689
)
(997,439
)
(301,920
)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
758,057
114,996
1,198,914
248,282
(231,452
)
FFO (1)
1,273,680
1,208,458
1,024,567
824,851
421,506
Normalized FFO (1)
1,330,018
1,220,709
1,120,225
776,963
453,981
Balance Sheet Data
Real estate investments, at cost
$
23,010,945
$
21,403,592
$
19,745,607
$
17,830,262
$
6,747,699
Cash and cash equivalents
55,348
94,816
67,908
45,807
21,812
Total assets
21,226,171
19,731,494
18,980,000
17,271,910
5,758,021
Senior notes payable and other debt
10,888,092
9,364,992
8,413,646
6,429,116
2,900,044
_______________
(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
43
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
2014
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, 2014
, we owned more than
1,500
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical
44
office buildings (“MOBs”), skilled nursing and other facilities, and hospitals, and we had
one
new property 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, 2014
, we leased a total of
922
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
270
of our seniors housing communities (excluding properties classified as held for sale) for us pursuant to long-term management agreements. Our two largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”), leased from us
160
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) and
83
properties, respectively, as of
December 31, 2014
.
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 unsecured 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, 2014
, our consolidated portfolio included 100% ownership interests in
1,383
properties and controlling joint venture interests in
50
properties, and we had non-controlling ownership interests in
51
properties through investments in unconsolidated entities. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we provided management and leasing services to third parties with respect to
75
MOBs as of
December 31, 2014
.
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, 2014
,
21.9%
of our consolidated debt (excluding debt related to properties classified as held for sale) was variable rate debt.
2014
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
•
In 2014, we paid an annual cash dividend on our common stock of
$2.965
per share.
•
During 2014, we made investments totaling approximately
$2.4 billion
in seniors housing and healthcare assets, including 29 seniors housing communities located in Canada that we acquired from Holiday Retirement (the “Holiday Canada Acquisition”), three high-quality private hospitals located in the United Kingdom and 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.
•
In January 2015, we acquired publicly traded American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction (the “HCT Acquisition”), which added 152 properties (some of which are located on the same campus) to our portfolio. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately 28.4 million shares of our common stock, 1.1 million limited partnership units that are redeemable for shares of our common stock, cash and the assumption of debt.
•
In 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately $320 million, including the acquisition of five triple-net leased properties in the United Kingdom and 12 skilled nursing facilities.
•
In April 2014, we issued and sold $700 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes with a weighted average interest rate of 2.75% and a weighted average maturity of seven years.
45
•
In September 2014, we issued and sold CAD
650.0 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with an effective weighted average interest rate of
3.5%
and a weighted average maturity of
6.9
years, on a private placement basis in Canada. We used the net proceeds from the sale to repay a portion of the CAD
791.0 million
unsecured term loan we incurred initially to fund the Holiday Canada Acquisition.
•
In January 2015, we issued and sold $900 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with a weighted average interest rate of 3.8% and a weighted average maturity of 16.7 years, and we issued and sold CAD 250.0 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes, with an interest rate of 3.3% and a maturity of seven years, on a private placement basis in Canada.
•
Under our “at-the-market” equity offering program, during 2014 and 2015 we issued and sold a total of approximately
7.1 million
shares of our common stock at a weighted average price of
$75.18
per share for aggregate net proceeds (after sales agent commissions) of
$528.1 million
.
•
During 2014, we sold
22
properties for
$118.2 million
and received loans receivable repayments of
$55.9 million
.
•
In 2015, we sold 17 properties for $275.1 million, including $5.5 million of lease termination fees.
•
As of December 31, 2014, we had re-leased to Kindred, transitioned to new operators or sold 107 of the 108 licensed healthcare assets whose lease terms with Kindred were scheduled to expire on September 30, 2014, and we expect to sell the remaining asset during 2015. See “Triple-Net Lease Expirations.”
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 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.
46
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 allocate 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 allocating 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 allocation assessments directly impact our results of operations, as amounts allocated to 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 and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, not to exceed 35 years. We determine the allocated 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 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
47
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.
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. The determination of the fair value of investments in unconsolidated entities involves significant judgment, and our estimates consider all available evidence, including, as appropriate, the present value of the expected future cash flows discounted at market rates, general economic conditions and trends and other relevant factors.
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
48
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, investments in real estate and intangible assets are based upon discounted future cash flow projections or other acceptable valuation techniques that are based, in turn, upon various estimates and assumptions, such as revenue and expense growth rates, capitalization rates, discount rates 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 unsecured 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).
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.
49
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 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,” we record income tax expense or benefit, as those entities are subject to federal income tax similar to regular corporations.
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.
50
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Standards
In 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2014-08,
Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity
(“ASU 2014-08”), which raises the threshold for disposals to qualify as discontinued operations. A discontinued operation is defined as: (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. ASU 2014-08 also requires additional disclosures regarding discontinued operations, as well as material disposals that do not meet the definition of discontinued operations. The application of this guidance is prospective from the date of adoption and applies only to disposals (or new classifications to held for sale) that have not been reported as discontinued operations in our previously issued financial statements. We adopted ASU 2014-08 during the quarter ended March 31, 2014.
In 2014, the FASB also issued Accounting Standards Update 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. ASU 2014-09 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2017. 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.
Results of Operations
As of
December 31, 2014
, 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 our 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 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 miscellaneous accounts receivable.
51
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
$
974,942
$
881,745
$
93,197
10.6
%
Senior Living Operations
516,395
449,321
67,074
14.9
MOB Operations
310,513
300,921
9,592
3.2
All Other
57,439
59,471
(2,032
)
(3.4
)
Total segment NOI
1,859,289
1,691,458
167,831
9.9
Interest and other income
4,267
2,047
2,220
> 100
Interest expense
(376,842
)
(334,909
)
(41,933
)
(12.5
)
Depreciation and amortization
(826,911
)
(722,075
)
(104,836
)
(14.5
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(121,746
)
(115,106
)
(6,640
)
(5.8
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(5,564
)
(1,201
)
(4,363
)
( > 100 )
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(45,051
)
(21,634
)
(23,417
)
( > 100 )
Other
(38,925
)
(18,732
)
(20,193
)
( > 100 )
Income before loss from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
448,517
479,848
(31,331
)
(6.5
)
Loss from unconsolidated entities
(139
)
(508
)
369
72.6
Income tax benefit
8,732
11,828
(3,096
)
(26.2
)
Income from continuing operations
457,110
491,168
(34,058
)
(6.9
)
Discontinued operations
2,106
(36,279
)
38,385
> 100
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
—
17,970
nm
Net income
477,186
454,889
22,297
4.9
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,419
1,380
(39
)
(2.8
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
453,509
22,258
4.9
nm—not meaningful
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
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
970,377
$
877,276
$
93,101
10.6
%
Other services revenue
4,565
4,469
96
2.1
Segment NOI
$
974,942
$
881,745
93,197
10.6
52
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.
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, 2014
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2014
(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, 2013
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2013
.
Number of Properties at December 31, 2014 (1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2014 (1)
Number of Properties at December 31, 2013 (1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2013 (1)
Seniors Housing Communities
439
88.3
%
412
87.1
%
Skilled Nursing Facilities
242
80.1
242
80.8
Hospitals
46
56.4
46
56.6
(1)
Excludes properties included in discontinued operations during 2014 and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
, 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, 2014 and 2013, respectively, 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
829
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
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
876,846
$
846,552
$
30,294
3.6
%
Other services revenue
4,565
4,469
96
2.1
Segment NOI
$
881,411
$
851,021
30,390
3.6
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
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
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
53
health care fees and other ancillary service income. 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 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.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
220
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
$
1,391,869
$
1,363,696
$
28,173
2.1
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(942,169
)
(929,968
)
(12,201
)
(1.3
)
Segment NOI
$
449,700
$
433,728
15,972
3.7
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
237
91.1
%
91.1
%
$
5,407
$
5,470
Same-store seniors housing communities
220
220
91.1
91.2
5,653
5,533
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
$
463,618
$
450,107
$
13,511
3.0
%
Medical office building services revenue
22,529
12,077
10,452
86.5
Total revenues
486,147
462,184
23,963
5.2
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(158,542
)
(152,948
)
(5,594
)
(3.7
)
Medical office building services costs
(17,092
)
(8,315
)
(8,777
)
(105.6
)
Segment NOI
$
310,513
$
300,921
9,592
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.
54
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
295
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
$
440,463
$
435,494
$
4,969
1.1
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(150,282
)
(147,693
)
(2,589
)
(1.8
)
Segment NOI
$
290,181
$
287,801
2,380
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 Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2014
2013
2014
2013
Total MOBs
309
307
90.1
%
90.2
%
$31
$29
Same-store MOBs
295
295
90.1
90.1
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
$1.7 million
and
$5.5 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively, is attributed primarily to
$50.9 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
$104.8 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
$6.6 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
$23.4 million
increase
in merger-related expenses and deal costs in
2014
over the prior year is primarily due to increased 2014 investment activity.
55
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 certain taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS” or “TRS entities”). Income tax benefit for
2013
was due primarily to the release of valuation allowances against certain deferred tax assets of one of our TRS entities.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations for
2014
reflects activity related to
17
properties,
12
of which were sold during
2014
, resulting in a net gain of
$1.2 million
, and
five
of which were classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
. Discontinued operations for
2013
reflects activity related to
39
properties,
22
of which were sold during
2013
, resulting in a net gain of
$3.6 million
.
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.
Net Income/Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest for
2014
represents our partners’ joint venture interests in
51
properties. Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest for
2013
represents our partners’ joint venture interests in
58
properties.
56
Years Ended
December 31, 2013
and
2012
The table below shows our results of operations for the years ended December 31,
2013
and
2012
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
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
$
881,745
$
824,320
$
57,425
7.0
%
Senior Living Operations
449,321
386,102
63,219
16.4
MOB Operations
300,921
241,869
59,052
24.4
All Other
59,471
39,913
19,558
49.0
Total segment NOI
1,691,458
1,492,204
199,254
13.4
Interest and other income
2,047
1,106
941
85.1
Interest expense
(334,909
)
(288,717
)
(46,192
)
(16.0
)
Depreciation and amortization
(722,075
)
(714,967
)
(7,108
)
(1.0
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(115,106
)
(98,510
)
(16,596
)
(16.8
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(1,201
)
(37,640
)
36,439
96.8
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(21,634
)
(63,183
)
41,549
65.8
Other
(18,732
)
(6,940
)
(11,792
)
( > 100 )
Income before (loss) income from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations and noncontrolling interest
479,848
283,353
196,495
69.3
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(508
)
18,154
(18,662
)
( > 100 )
Income tax benefit
11,828
6,282
5,546
88.3
Income from continuing operations
491,168
307,789
183,379
59.6
Discontinued operations
(36,279
)
53,986
(90,265
)
( > 100 )
Net income
454,889
361,775
93,114
25.7
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest, net of tax
1,380
(1,025
)
(2,405
)
( > 100 )
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
453,509
$
362,800
95,519
26.3
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 (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
877,276
$
819,882
$
57,394
7.0
%
Other services revenue
4,469
4,438
31
0.7
Segment NOI
$
881,745
$
824,320
57,425
7.0
Triple-net leased properties segment NOI
increased
in 2013 over the prior year primarily due to contractual rent escalations pursuant to the terms of our leases, increases in base and other rent under certain of our existing triple-net leases and rent from the properties we acquired during 2013 and 2012.
57
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
807
same-store triple-net leased properties.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
823,380
$
806,267
$
17,113
2.1
%
Other services revenue
4,469
4,438
31
0.7
Segment NOI
$
827,849
$
810,705
17,144
2.1
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
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,406,005
$
1,227,124
$
178,881
14.6
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(956,684
)
(841,022
)
(115,662
)
(13.8
)
Segment NOI
$
449,321
$
386,102
63,219
16.4
Our senior living operations segment revenues
increased
in
2013
over the prior year primarily due to the seniors housing communities we acquired during 2013 and 2012, including 16 seniors housing communities managed by Sunrise that we acquired in May 2012 (the “Sunrise-Managed 16 Communities”) and 25 seniors housing communities whose operations we transitioned to Atria at the time of closing, and higher average unit occupancy rates and higher average monthly revenue per occupied room in our communities.
Property-level operating expenses
increased
in
2013
over the prior year primarily due to the acquired properties described above, increases in salaries, taxes and insurance costs and higher management fees as a result of increased revenues.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
195
same-store senior living operating communities.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,215,185
$
1,158,422
$
56,763
4.9
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(830,076
)
(793,828
)
(36,248
)
(4.6
)
Segment NOI
$
385,109
$
364,594
20,515
5.6
Same-store senior living operations NOI
increased
in
2013
over the prior year primarily due to higher average unit occupancy rates and higher average monthly revenue per occupied room, partially offset by increases in salaries, taxes and insurance costs and higher management fees as a result of increased revenues.
58
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, 2013
and
2012
:
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,
2013
2012
2013
2012
2013
2012
Total seniors housing communities
237
220
91.1
%
89.8
%
$5,470
$5,349
Same-store seniors housing communities
195
195
91.3
90.0
5,557
5,356
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
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
450,107
$
360,849
$
89,258
24.7
%
Medical office building services revenue
12,077
16,303
(4,226
)
(25.9
)
Total revenues
462,184
377,152
85,032
22.5
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(152,948
)
(125,400
)
(27,548
)
(22.0
)
Medical office building services costs
(8,315
)
(9,883
)
1,568
15.9
Segment NOI
$
300,921
$
241,869
59,052
24.4
The increases in our MOB operations segment revenues and property-level operating expenses in
2013
over the prior year are primarily due to our acquisition of Cogdell Spencer Inc. (“Cogdell”) in April 2012, the August 2012 and March 2013 acquisitions of the controlling interests in 38 MOBs that we had previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities and other MOBs we acquired during 2013 and 2012.
Medical office building services revenue and costs both decreased year over year primarily due to a reduction in construction activity during 2013 compared to 2012 and our acquisitions of the controlling interests in 38 MOBs that we had previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities, which reduced our management fee revenue.
The following table compares results of continuing operations for our
184
same-store MOBs.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease)
to Segment NOI
2013
2012
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—MOB Operations:
Rental income
$
257,085
$
256,684
$
401
0.2
%
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(85,219
)
(86,890
)
1,671
1.9
Segment NOI
$
171,866
$
169,794
2,072
1.2
Same-store MOB operations NOI increased primarily due to lower expenses as a result of savings in contract cleaning, real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, and management fees throughout 2013.
59
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, 2013
and
2012
:
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2013
2012
2013
2012
2013
2012
Total MOBs
309
298
90.2
%
90.5
%
$29
$29
Same-store MOBs
184
184
88.8
89.6
30
30
Segment NOI—All Other
All other NOI consists solely of income from loans and investments. Income from loans and investments
increased
in
2013
over the prior year due primarily to $446.0 million aggregate amount of secured loans and other investments we made in December 2012 and thereafter, which had a weighted average effective interest rate of 9.3% at issuance, partially offset by final repayments on and the sales of portions of certain loans receivable throughout 2013.
Interest Expense
The
$38.4 million
increase
in total interest expense, including interest allocated to discontinued operations of
$5.5 million
and
$13.3 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2013
and
2012
, respectively, is attributed primarily to $55.3 million of additional interest due to higher debt balances, partially offset by a $14.8 million reduction in interest due to lower effective interest rates, including the amortization of any fair value adjustments. Our effective interest rate, excluding activity related to our capital leases in 2012, was 3.8% for
2013
, as compared to 4.0% for
2012
.
General, Administrative and Professional Fees
General, administrative and professional fees
increased
in
2013
primarily due to our continued organizational growth, as a result of the Cogdell acquisition and subsequent thereto.
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt, Net
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. The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in 2012 resulted primarily from our redemption in March 2012 of all $200.0 million principal amount outstanding of our 6½% senior notes due 2016 and our redemption in May 2012 of all $225.0 million principal amount then outstanding of our 6¾% senior notes due 2017, partially offset by gains recognized on the repayment of certain mortgage debt.
Merger-Related Expenses and Deal Costs
Merger-related expenses and deal costs in both years consist of transition and integration expenses related to consummated transactions and deal costs required by GAAP to be expensed rather than capitalized into the asset value. The
$41.5 million
decrease
in merger-related expenses and deal costs in 2013 over the prior year reflects lower transition and integration costs attributable to a decline in investment activity in 2013 compared to 2012.
Other
Other consists primarily of building rent expense paid to lease certain of our senior living operating communities. Certain of these leasing arrangements were acquired in late December 2012.
Loss/Income from Unconsolidated Entities
Loss/income from unconsolidated entities in
2013
and
2012
relates to our interests in joint ventures that we account for under the equity method of accounting. Income from unconsolidated entities for the year ended December 31, 2012 is attributed primarily to a gain of $16.6 million as a result of the re-measurement of equity interest upon our acquisition of the controlling interests (ranging from 80% to 95%) in 36 MOBs that we previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities. Since the acquisition date, operations relating to these properties have been consolidated in our Consolidated Statements of Income. As of
December 31, 2013
, we had ownership interests ranging between 5% and 25% in joint ventures with respect to 18 MOBs, 20 seniors housing communities and 14 skilled nursing facilities, and we had a 34% ownership interest in Atria, which we acquired in late December 2012.
60
Income Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit for
2013
was due primarily to the release of valuation allowances against certain deferred tax assets of one of our TRS entities. Income tax benefit for 2012 was due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses related to our TRS entities, partially offset by a valuation allowance recorded against certain deferred tax assets of one of our other TRS entities.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations for
2013
reflects activity related to
39
properties,
22
of which were sold during
2013
, resulting in a net gain of
$3.6 million
. Discontinued operations for
2012
reflects activity related to
82
properties,
43
of which were sold during
2012
, resulting in a net gain of
$81.0 million
.
Net Income/Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest for
2013
represents our partners’ joint venture interests in
58
properties. Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest for
2012
represents our partners’ joint venture interests in
57
properties.
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 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
61
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.
The following table summarizes our FFO and normalized FFO for each of the five years ended
December 31, 2014
. Our normalized FFO for the year ended
December 31, 2014
increased over the prior year due primarily to our 2014 and 2013 investments, net of capital costs, and same-store growth across our portfolio of properties, partially offset by higher general and administrative expenses and loan repayments since January 1, 2013.
For the Year Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
(In thousands)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
453,509
$
362,800
$
364,493
$
246,167
Adjustments:
Real estate depreciation and amortization
820,344
716,412
710,544
442,046
197,650
Real estate depreciation related to noncontrolling interest
(10,314
)
(10,512
)
(8,503
)
(3,471
)
(6,217
)
Real estate depreciation related to unconsolidated entities
5,792
6,543
7,516
6,552
2,367
Gain on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
—
(1,241
)
(16,645
)
—
—
Gain on real estate dispositions
(17,970
)
—
—
—
—
Discontinued operations:
Gain on real estate dispositions
(1,494
)
(4,059
)
(80,952
)
—
(25,241
)
Depreciation on real estate assets
1,555
47,806
49,807
15,231
6,780
FFO
1,273,680
1,208,458
1,024,567
824,851
421,506
Adjustments:
Litigation proceeds, net
—
—
—
(202,259
)
—
Change in fair value of financial instruments
5,121
449
99
2,959
—
Income tax (benefit) expense
(9,431
)
(11,828
)
(6,286
)
(31,137
)
2,930
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
5,013
1,048
37,640
27,604
9,791
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
54,389
21,560
63,183
153,923
19,243
Amortization of other intangibles
1,246
1,022
1,022
1,022
511
Normalized FFO
$
1,330,018
$
1,220,709
$
1,120,225
$
776,963
$
453,981
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 Adjusted EBITDA to net income (including amounts in discontinued operations) for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Net income
$
477,186
$
454,889
$
361,775
Adjustments:
Interest
378,556
340,381
302,031
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
5,564
1,048
37,640
Taxes (including amounts in general, administrative and professional fees)
(4,770
)
(7,166
)
(2,627
)
Depreciation and amortization
828,466
769,881
764,774
Non-cash stock-based compensation expense
20,994
20,653
20,784
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
53,847
21,634
63,183
Gain on real estate dispositions
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
(80,952
)
Changes in fair value of financial instruments
5,121
449
99
Gain on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
—
(1,241
)
(16,645
)
Adjusted EBITDA
$
1,745,781
$
1,596,911
$
1,450,062
63
NOI
We also consider NOI an important supplemental measure to net income because it enables 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 our NOI to net income (including amounts in discontinued operations) for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Net income
$
477,186
$
454,889
$
361,775
Adjustments:
Interest and other income
(5,017
)
(2,047
)
(6,158
)
Interest
378,556
340,381
302,031
Depreciation and amortization
828,466
769,881
764,774
General, administrative and professional fees
121,746
115,109
98,813
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
5,564
1,048
37,640
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
45,051
21,634
63,183
Other
39,337
18,325
8,842
Loss (income) from unconsolidated entities
139
508
(18,154
)
Income tax benefit
(8,732
)
(11,828
)
(6,286
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
(80,952
)
NOI
1,863,113
1,704,283
1,525,508
Discontinued operations
(3,824
)
(12,825
)
(33,304
)
NOI (excluding amounts in discontinued operations)
$
1,859,289
$
1,691,458
$
1,492,204
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
Market risk related to changes in interest rates, such as LIBOR or prime rates, has a direct impact on 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. To mitigate these risks, we continuously monitor our level of floating rate debt with respect to total debt and other factors, including our expectations regarding current and future economic conditions.
64
The table below sets forth certain information with respect to our debt, excluding premiums, discounts and capital lease obligations.
As of December 31,
2014
2013
2012
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
$
6,677,875
$
5,418,543
$
4,079,643
Mortgage loans and other (1)
1,810,716
2,155,155
2,442,652
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
919,099
376,343
540,727
Unsecured term loans
990,634
1,000,702
685,336
Mortgage loans and other
474,047
369,734
437,957
Total
$
10,872,371
$
9,320,477
$
8,186,315
Percent of total debt:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
61.4
%
58.1
%
49.8
%
Mortgage loans and other (1)
16.6
23.1
29.8
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
8.5
4.0
6.6
Unsecured term loans
9.1
10.7
8.4
Mortgage loans and other
4.4
4.1
5.4
Total
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Weighted average interest rate at end of period:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other
3.5
%
3.7
%
4.0
%
Mortgage loans and other (1)
5.9
6.0
6.1
Variable rate:
Unsecured revolving credit facilities
1.4
1.2
1.5
Unsecured term loans
1.3
1.3
1.6
Mortgage loans and other
2.3
1.7
1.9
Total
3.5
3.8
4.1
(1)
Excludes mortgage debt of
$43.5 million
,
$13.1 million
and
$23.2 million
related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, respectively, which debt is included in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The variable rate debt in the table above reflects, in part, the effect of
$153.6 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with a maturity of March 21, 2016 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
$59.0 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from March 2, 2015 to April 1, 2019, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt. The
increase
in our outstanding variable rate debt at
December 31, 2014
compared to
December 31, 2013
is attributable primarily to 2014 borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility. 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, 2014
, our tenant is required to pay us additional rent (on a dollar-for-dollar 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 no change in our variable rate debt outstanding as of
December 31, 2014
, if the weighted average interest rate related to our variable rate debt were to increase 100 basis points, interest expense for
2015
would increase by approximately
$23.8 million
, or
$0.08
per diluted common share.
65
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, our joint venture and operating partners’ aggregate share of total debt was
$141.4 million
and
$174.5 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
$97.5 million
and
$89.3 million
as of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, 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 fair value, but not our earnings or cash flows. Therefore, interest rate risk does not significantly impact 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 increased 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 (“BPS”) in interest rates as of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
As of December 31,
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Gross book value
$
8,488,591
$
7,573,698
Fair value (1)
8,817,982
7,690,196
Fair value reflecting change in interest rates (1):
-100 BPS
9,256,492
8,069,013
+100 BPS
8,406,735
7,320,251
(1)
The change in fair value of our fixed rate debt from
December 31, 2013
to
December 31, 2014
was due primarily to 2014 senior note issuances, partially offset by mortgage loan repayments.
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, the fair value of our secured and unsecured loans receivable, based on our estimates of currently prevailing rates for comparable loans, was
$798.0 million
and
$395.7 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, 2014 (on a pro forma basis after giving effect to the Holiday Canada Acquisition, our 2014 Canadian senior note issuances, our U.K. hospital acquisition, and 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 10% compared to the average exchange rate during that year, our 2014 normalized FFO per share would have decreased or increased, as applicable, by less than $0.02 and $0.02 per share, respectively. 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,
2014
2013
Investment mix by asset type (1):
Seniors housing communities
65.5
%
64.2
%
MOBs
15.8
18.2
Skilled nursing and other facilities
13.1
13.6
Hospitals
2.1
2.3
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
3.5
1.7
Investment mix by tenant, operator and manager (1):
Atria
23.6
%
19.9
%
Sunrise
12.3
13.9
Brookdale Senior Living
10.2
9.7
Kindred
2.0
3.2
All other
51.9
53.3
(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,
2014
2013
2012
Operations mix by tenant and operator and business model:
Revenues (1):
Senior living operations
50.6
%
50.2
%
49.8
%
Kindred
6.2
8.1
10.3
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
5.5
5.6
6.3
All others
37.7
36.1
33.6
Adjusted EBITDA (3):
Senior living operations
28.4
%
27.1
%
26.0
%
Kindred
10.1
13.3
16.1
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
9.2
9.4
10.9
All others
52.3
50.2
47.0
NOI (4):
Senior living operations
27.8
%
26.6
%
25.9
%
Kindred
10.2
13.4
17.1
Brookdale Senior Living (2)
9.2
9.2
10.5
All others
52.8
50.8
46.5
Operations mix by geographic location (5):
California
15.0
%
14.5
%
14.1
%
New York
9.6
10.0
10.0
Texas
6.9
6.8
6.0
Illinois
4.5
4.7
5.0
Florida
4.0
4.1
4.1
All others
60.0
59.9
60.8
(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 Adjusted EBITDA and NOI to our net income 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, 2014
,
44.0%
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 and Kindred creates credit risk. If either Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us, our financial condition and results of operations could be weakened and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be limited. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective
68
obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred 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
As our triple-net leases expire, we face the risk that our tenants may elect not to renew those leases and, in the event of non-renewal, 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 the non-renewal of some or all of our triple-net leases could have a Material Adverse Effect on us, during the year ended
December 31, 2014
, none of our triple-net lease renewals or expirations without renewal 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, 2014
):
Number of
Properties
2014 Annual
Rental Income
% of 2014 Total
Triple-Net Leased Properties Segment Rental
Income
(Dollars in thousands)
2015
14
$
8,016
0.8
%
2016
13
8,023
0.8
2017
28
20,425
2.1
2018
37
59,088
6.1
2019
87
129,617
13.4
2020
140
123,390
12.7
2021
82
72,704
7.5
2022
51
58,893
6.1
2023
64
78,203
8.1
2024
45
27,880
2.9
As of December 31, 2014, we had re-leased to Kindred, transitioned to new operators or sold 107 of the 108 licensed healthcare assets whose lease terms with Kindred were scheduled to expire on September 30, 2014, and we expect to sell the remaining asset during 2015; however, this transaction remains subject to customary due diligence conditions, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully complete the sale on a timely basis or at all.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had a total of
$55.3 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, 2014
, we also had escrow deposits and restricted cash of
$71.8 million
and
$1.1 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
During
2014
, 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
$634.4 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 approximately $11 million in cash (excluding cash in lieu of fractional shares) and the assumption or repayment of debt, net of HCT cash in hand.
70
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, 2014
, 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, 2014
. 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, 2014
, we had
$919.1 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$13.3 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$1.1 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
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 borrowings 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 all remaining amounts outstanding under the term loan.
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, 2014
.
Senior Notes
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$5.8 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:
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.125% senior notes due 2015;
•
$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;
•
$258.8 million
principal amount of 5.45% senior notes due 2043; and
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 5.70% senior notes due 2043.
With the exception of the senior notes due 2016, the senior notes due 2017, the senior notes due 2024, and the 5.70% senior notes due 2043, all of these senior notes were co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation.
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$309.8 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our subsidiary, Nationwide Health Properties, LLC (“NHP LLC”), as successor to NHP, outstanding as follows:
•
$234.4 million
principal amount of 6% senior notes due 2015;
•
$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).
71
In addition, as of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$559.3 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, and guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. outstanding as follows:
•
$344.2 million
(CAD
400.0 million
) principal amount of 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019; and
•
$215.1 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. The notes are guaranteed by Ventas, Inc.
Also in January 2015, our wholly owned subsidiary, 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 are guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. and were offered on a private placement basis in Canada.
2014 Activity
In April 2014, we 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, our wholly owned subsidiary, 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. We used the proceeds from the issuance to repay a portion of the CAD
791.0 million
unsecured term loan.
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.
2012 Activity
In February 2012, we issued and sold
$600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.25%
senior notes due 2022 at a public offering price equal to
99.214%
of par, for total proceeds of
$595.3 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In April 2012, we issued and sold $
600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.00%
senior notes due 2019 at a public offering price equal to
99.489%
of par, for total proceeds of
$596.9 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In August 2012, we initially issued and sold
$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.25%
senior notes due 2022 (“2022 notes”) at a public offering price equal to
99.027%
of par, for total proceeds of
$272.3 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses. In December 2012, we issued and sold an additional
$225.0 million
principal amount of 2022 notes at a public offering price equal to
98.509%
of par, for total proceeds of
$221.6 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
72
Also in December 2012, we issued and sold
$700.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.00%
senior notes due 2018 at a public offering price equal to
99.739%
of par, for total proceeds of
$698.2 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
During 2012, we repaid in full, at par,
$155.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
9%
senior notes due 2012 and our
8.25%
senior notes due 2012 upon maturity, and we redeemed: all
$225.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our 6¾% senior notes due 2017 at a redemption price equal to
103.375%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date; and all
$200.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our 6½% senior notes due 2016 at a redemption price equal to
103.25%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, in each case pursuant to the terms of the applicable indenture governing the notes. As a result of these redemptions, we recognized a total loss on extinguishment of debt of
$39.7 million
.
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, 2014
.
Mortgage Loan Obligations
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, our consolidated aggregate principal amount of mortgage debt outstanding was
$2.3 billion
and
$2.5 billion
, respectively, of which our share was
$2.2 billion
and
$2.4 billion
, respectively.
During 2014, we assumed or originated 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 originated 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.
During 2012, we assumed
$380.3 million
of mortgage debt and repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$344.2 million
. We recognized a gain on extinguishment of debt of
$2.1 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
2014
, our Board of Directors declared and we paid cash dividends on our common stock aggregating
$2.965
per share, which exceeds 100% of our
2014
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
2015
. In connection with the HCT Acquisition, on January 5, 2015, our Board of Directors declared a prorated first quarter dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.2107 per share, which was paid in cash on January 27, 2015 to stockholders of record on January 15, 2015. On
February 13, 2015
, our Board of Directors declared another prorated dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.5793 per share, payable in cash on
March 31, 2015
to stockholders of record on
March 6, 2015
. Together, these two prorated amounts equate to the first quarterly installment of our 2015 dividend of $0.79 per share.
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
73
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 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, 2014
, we had
one
new property under development pursuant to these agreements. Through
December 31, 2014
, we have funded
$3.4 million
of our estimated total commitment over the projected development period (
$10.0 million
to
$11.0 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 may sell from time to time up to an aggregate of
$750 million
of our common stock. During the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we issued and sold a total of
3,381,678
shares of common stock under the program for aggregate net proceeds of
$242.3 million
(all of which was received in the fourth quarter of 2014), after sales agent commissions of
$3.7 million
. As of
December 31, 2014
, approximately
$360.4 million
of our common stock remained available for sale under our ATM equity offering program. In January 2015, we issued and sold a total of
3,750,202
shares of common stock under the ATM program for aggregate net proceeds of
$285.8 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$4.4 million
.
During 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
.
In December 2012, through our acquisition of certain private equity funds, we acquired
3.7 million
shares of our common stock that were held in treasury and subsequently canceled in February 2014. See “Note 4—Acquisitions of Real Estate Property.”
In June 2012, we completed the public offering and sale of
5,980,000
shares of our common stock for
$342.5 million
in aggregate proceeds.
In April 2012, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3 relating to the sale, from time to time, of an indeterminate amount of debt securities and related guarantees, common stock, preferred stock, depositary shares and warrants. This registration statement replaced our previous automatic shelf registration statement, which expired pursuant to the SEC’s rules.
Other
We received proceeds of
$26.2 million
and
$6.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, 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
2,460,628
as of
December 31, 2014
, from
2,258,763
as of
December 31, 2013
. The weighted average exercise price was
$57.45
as of
December 31, 2014
.
We issued approximately
19,000
and
29,000
shares of common stock under our Distribution Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan (“DRIP”) for net proceeds of
$1.2 million
and
$1.9 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively. 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.
74
Cash Flows
The following table sets forth our sources and uses of cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease)
to Cash
2014
2013
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
$
94,816
$
67,908
$
26,908
39.6
%
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,254,845
1,194,755
60,090
5.0
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
(772,280
)
(60.2
)
Net cash provided by financing activities
758,057
114,996
643,061
> 100
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
2,670
(83
)
2,753
> 100
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
55,348
$
94,816
(39,468
)
(41.6
)
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Cash flows from operating activities
increased
in
2014
over the prior year primarily due to our 2013 and 2014 investments, net of capital costs, and same-store growth across our portfolio of properties, partially offset by higher general and administrative expenses and merger-related expenses and deal costs, and expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements and related matters.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Cash used in investing activities during
2014
and
2013
consisted primarily of cash paid for our investments in real estate (
$1.5 billion
and
$1.4 billion
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), investments in loans receivable (
$499.0 million
and
$38.0 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), purchase of marketable securities (
$96.7 million
in
2014
), capital expenditures (
$87.5 million
and
$81.6 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively) and development project expenditures (
$107.0 million
and
$95.7 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively). These uses were partially offset by proceeds from loans receivable (
$73.6 million
and
$325.5 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), proceeds from the sale or maturity of marketable debt securities (
$21.7 million
and
$5.5 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), and proceeds from real estate dispositions (
$118.2 million
and
$35.6 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively).
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Cash provided by financing activities during
2014
and
2013
consisted primarily of net borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility (
$540.2 million
in
2014
), net proceeds from the issuance of debt (
$2.0 billion
and
$2.8 billion
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively) and net proceeds from the issuance of common stock (
$242.1 million
and
$141.3 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively). These cash inflows were partially offset by debt repayments (
$1.2 billion
and
$1.8 billion
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), cash distributions to common stockholders, unitholders and noncontrolling interest parties (
$890.9 million
and
$816.4 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively), net payments made on our unsecured revolving credit facility (
$164.0 million
in
2013
) and payments for deferred financing costs (
$14.2 million
and
$31.3 million
in
2014
and
2013
, respectively).
75
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, 2014
:
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)
$
13,732,517
$
1,115,801
$
2,353,837
$
4,800,182
$
5,462,697
Operating obligations, including ground lease obligations
628,432
33,259
52,307
33,682
509,184
Total
$
14,360,949
$
1,149,060
$
2,406,144
$
4,833,864
$
5,971,881
(1)
Amounts represent contractual amounts due, including interest.
(2)
Interest on variable rate debt was based on forward rates obtained as of
December 31, 2014
.
(3)
Excludes
$43.5 million
of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
that is scheduled to mature between 2015 and 2018.
(4)
Includes
$400.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.125% senior notes due 2015 and
$234.4 million
outstanding principal amount of our 6% senior notes due 2015.
(5)
Includes
$550.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 1.55% senior notes due 2016 and
$300.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 1.250% senior notes due 2017.
(6)
Includes
$919.1 million
of borrowings outstanding on our unsecured revolving credit facility,
$700.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 2.00% senior notes due 2018,
$200.0 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2018,
$790.6 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2019,
$600.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 4.00% senior notes due 2019 and
$344.2 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019.
(7)
Includes
$3.5 billion
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our senior notes maturing between 2020 and 2043.
$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, 2014
, we had
$25.4 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.
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, 2014 and 2013
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedule
s
Schedule II—Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
137
Schedule III—Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
138
Schedule IV—Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
185
77
MANAGEMENT REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of Ventas, Inc. (the “Company”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the original framework (1992 framework) established in a report entitled
Internal Control-Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on this evaluation, management has determined that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2014
was effective.
The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2014
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 as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, 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, 2014. 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, 2014 and 2013, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2014, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the 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 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 Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (1992) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated February 13, 2015 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ KPMG LLP
February 13, 2015
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, 2014, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (1992)
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, 2014, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
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, 2014 and 2013, 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, 2014, respectively, and our report dated February 13, 2015 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 13, 2015
80
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
2014
2013
(In thousands, except per
share amounts)
Assets
Real estate investments:
Land and improvements
$
1,956,128
$
1,855,968
Buildings and improvements
19,895,043
18,457,028
Construction in progress
120,123
80,415
Acquired lease intangibles
1,039,651
1,010,181
23,010,945
21,403,592
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
(4,025,386
)
(3,328,006
)
Net real estate property
18,985,559
18,075,586
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
829,756
376,229
Investments in unconsolidated entities
91,872
91,656
Net real estate investments
19,907,187
18,543,471
Cash and cash equivalents
55,348
94,816
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
71,771
84,657
Deferred financing costs, net
60,328
62,215
Other assets
1,131,537
946,335
Total assets
$
21,226,171
$
19,731,494
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
10,888,092
$
9,364,992
Accrued interest
62,097
54,349
Accounts payable and other liabilities
1,005,232
1,001,515
Deferred income taxes
344,337
250,167
Total liabilities
12,299,758
10,671,023
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
172,016
156,660
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, 298,478 and 297,901 shares issued at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively
74,656
74,488
Capital in excess of par value
10,119,306
10,078,592
Accumulated other comprehensive income
13,121
19,659
Retained earnings (deficit)
(1,526,388
)
(1,126,541
)
Treasury stock, 7 and 3,712 shares at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively
(511
)
(221,917
)
Total Ventas stockholders’ equity
8,680,184
8,824,281
Noncontrolling interest
74,213
79,530
Total equity
8,754,397
8,903,811
Total liabilities and equity
$
21,226,171
$
19,731,494
See accompanying notes.
81
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands, except per share
amounts)
Revenues:
Rental income:
Triple-net leased
$
970,377
$
877,276
$
819,882
Medical office buildings
463,618
450,107
360,849
1,433,995
1,327,383
1,180,731
Resident fees and services
1,552,951
1,406,005
1,227,124
Medical office building and other services revenue
29,364
17,809
20,741
Income from loans and investments
55,169
58,208
39,913
Interest and other income
4,267
2,047
1,106
Total revenues
3,075,746
2,811,452
2,469,615
Expenses:
Interest
376,842
334,909
288,717
Depreciation and amortization
826,911
722,075
714,967
Property-level operating expenses:
Senior living
1,036,556
956,684
841,022
Medical office buildings
158,542
152,948
125,400
1,195,098
1,109,632
966,422
Medical office building services costs
17,092
8,315
9,883
General, administrative and professional fees
121,746
115,106
98,510
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
5,564
1,201
37,640
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
45,051
21,634
63,183
Other
38,925
18,732
6,940
Total expenses
2,627,229
2,331,604
2,186,262
Income before (loss) income from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
448,517
479,848
283,353
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(139
)
(508
)
18,154
Income tax benefit
8,732
11,828
6,282
Income from continuing operations
457,110
491,168
307,789
Discontinued operations
2,106
(36,279
)
53,986
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
—
—
Net income
477,186
454,889
361,775
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,419
1,380
(1,025
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
453,509
$
362,800
Earnings per common share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.61
$
1.67
$
1.06
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.12
)
0.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.62
$
1.55
$
1.24
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.59
$
1.66
$
1.05
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.12
)
0.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.60
$
1.54
$
1.23
Weighted average shares used in computing earnings per common share:
Basic
294,175
292,654
292,064
Diluted
296,677
295,110
294,488
See accompanying notes.
82
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Net income
$
477,186
$
454,889
$
361,775
Other comprehensive (loss) income:
Foreign currency translation
(17,153
)
(5,422
)
2,375
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
7,001
(1,023
)
(1,296
)
Other
3,614
2,750
213
Total other comprehensive (loss) income
(6,538
)
(3,695
)
1,292
Comprehensive income
470,648
451,194
363,067
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest
1,419
1,380
(1,025
)
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
469,229
$
449,814
$
364,092
See accompanying notes.
83
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
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, 2012
$
72,240
$
9,593,583
$
22,062
$
(412,181
)
$
(747
)
$
9,274,957
$
80,987
$
9,355,944
Net income (loss)
—
—
—
362,800
—
362,800
(1,025
)
361,775
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
1,292
—
—
1,292
—
1,292
Acquisition-related activity
—
(8,571
)
—
—
(221,076
)
(229,647
)
(9,429
)
(239,076
)
Net change in noncontrolling interest
—
—
—
—
—
—
(5,194
)
(5,194
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$2.48 per share
—
—
—
(728,546
)
—
(728,546
)
—
(728,546
)
Issuance of common stock
1,495
340,974
—
—
—
342,469
—
342,469
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
128
22,126
—
—
2,841
25,095
—
25,095
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interest
—
(17,317
)
—
—
—
(17,317
)
4,896
(12,421
)
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
(19,819
)
—
—
—
(19,819
)
—
(19,819
)
Purchase of OP units
3
(1,651
)
—
—
324
(1,324
)
—
(1,324
)
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
38
11,637
—
—
(2,507
)
9,168
—
9,168
Balance at December 31, 2012
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
1,380
454,889
Other comprehensive income
—
—
(3,695
)
—
—
(3,695
)
—
(3,695
)
Acquisition-related activity
—
(762
)
—
—
—
(762
)
12,717
11,955
Net change in noncontrolling interest
—
—
—
—
—
—
(8,202
)
(8,202
)
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
—
—
—
475,767
—
475,767
1,419
477,186
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(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
(8,662
)
(7,499
)
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
See accompanying notes.
84
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income
$
477,186
$
454,889
$
361,775
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization (including amounts in discontinued operations)
828,467
769,881
764,775
Amortization of deferred revenue and lease intangibles, net
(18,871
)
(15,793
)
(17,118
)
Other non-cash amortization
(312
)
(16,745
)
(39,943
)
Stock-based compensation
20,994
20,653
20,784
Straight-lining of rental income, net
(38,687
)
(30,540
)
(24,042
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
5,564
1,048
37,640
Gain on real estate dispositions (including amounts in discontinued operations)
(19,183
)
(3,617
)
(80,952
)
Gain on real estate loan investments
(1,455
)
(5,056
)
(5,230
)
Gain on sale of marketable securities
—
(856
)
—
Income tax benefit (including amounts in discontinued operations)
(9,431
)
(11,828
)
(6,286
)
Loss (income) from unconsolidated entities
139
1,748
(1,509
)
Gain on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
—
(1,241
)
(16,645
)
Other
15,739
8,407
10,414
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Decrease (increase) in other assets
5,317
(690
)
3,756
Increase in accrued interest
7,958
6,806
9,969
(Decrease) increase in accounts payable and other liabilities
(18,580
)
17,689
(24,572
)
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,254,845
1,194,755
992,816
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(1,468,286
)
(1,437,002
)
(1,453,065
)
Purchase of private investment funds
—
—
(276,419
)
Purchase of noncontrolling interest
(9,115
)
(14,331
)
(3,934
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
(498,992
)
(37,963
)
(452,558
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
118,246
35,591
149,045
Proceeds from loans receivable
73,557
325,518
43,219
Purchase of marketable securities
(96,689
)
—
—
Proceeds from sale or maturity of marketable securities
21,689
5,493
37,500
Funds held in escrow for future development expenditures
4,590
19,458
(28,050
)
Development project expenditures
(106,988
)
(95,741
)
(114,002
)
Capital expenditures
(87,454
)
(81,614
)
(69,430
)
Other
(5,598
)
(2,169
)
(1,995
)
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
(2,169,689
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under credit facilities
540,203
(164,029
)
84,938
Proceeds from debt
2,007,707
2,767,546
2,710,405
Repayment of debt
(1,151,395
)
(1,792,492
)
(1,193,023
)
Payment of deferred financing costs
(14,220
)
(31,277
)
(23,770
)
Issuance of common stock, net
242,107
141,343
342,469
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(875,614
)
(802,123
)
(728,546
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(5,762
)
(5,040
)
(4,446
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
(503
)
(659
)
(4,601
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
491
2,395
38
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
(9,559
)
(9,286
)
(5,215
)
Other
24,602
8,618
20,665
Net cash provided by financing activities
758,057
114,996
1,198,914
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
(42,138
)
26,991
22,041
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
2,670
(83
)
60
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
94,816
67,908
45,807
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
55,348
$
94,816
$
67,908
85
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Interest paid including swap payments and receipts
$
361,144
$
338,311
$
329,655
Supplemental schedule of non-cash activities:
Assets and liabilities assumed from acquisitions:
Real estate investments
$
370,741
$
223,955
$
582,694
Utilization of funds held for an Internal Revenue Code Section 1031 exchange
—
—
(134,003
)
Other assets acquired
15,280
6,635
77,730
Debt assumed
241,076
183,848
412,825
Other liabilities
24,039
29,868
70,391
Deferred income tax liability
110,728
5,181
4,299
Noncontrolling interests
—
11,693
34,580
Equity issued
10,178
—
4,326
Debt transferred on the sale of assets
—
—
14,535
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, 2014
, we owned more than
1,500
properties (including properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), skilled nursing and other facilities, and hospitals, and we had
one
property 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, 2014
, we leased a total of
922
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
270
seniors housing communities for us pursuant to long-term management agreements. Our two largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) leased from us
160
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) and
83
properties, respectively, as of
December 31, 2014
.
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 unsecured 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.
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
87
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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, 2014
, third party investors owned
2,821,627
Class A limited partnership units in NHP/PMB (“OP Units”), which represented
29.6%
of the total units then outstanding, and we owned
6,710,261
Class B limited partnership units in NHP/PMB, representing the remaining
70.4%
. 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,
0.7866
shares of our common stock per unit, subject to 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.
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, 2014
and
2013
, the fair value of the redeemable OP unitholder interests was
$159.1 million
and
$111.6 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.
Certain noncontrolling interests of other consolidated joint ventures were also classified as redeemable at
December 31, 2014
and
2013
. 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
88
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 allocate 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 and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, generally not to exceed
35
years. We determine the allocated 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.
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 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. Net real estate property for which we have recorded a tenant purchase option intangible liability (excluding properties classified as held for sale) was
$354.1 million
and
$386.4 million
at
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively.
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
89
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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. The determination of the fair value of investments in unconsolidated entities involves significant judgment, and our estimates consider all available evidence, including, as appropriate, the present value of the expected future cash flows discounted at market rates, general economic conditions and trends and other relevant factors.
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, 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 level three inputs, such as revenue and expense growth rates, capitalization rates, discount rates 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.
90
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
In 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2014-08,
Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity
(“ASU 2014-08”), which raises the threshold for disposals to qualify as discontinued operations. A discontinued operation is defined as: (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. ASU 2014-08 also requires additional disclosures regarding discontinued operations, as well as material disposals that do not meet the definition of discontinued operations. The application of this guidance is prospective from the date of adoption and applies only to disposals (or new classifications to held for sale) that have not been reported as discontinued operations in our previously issued financial statements. We adopted ASU 2014-08 during the quarter ended March 31, 2014.
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 unsecured 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.
Escrow Deposits and Restricted Cash
Escrow deposits consist of amounts held by us or our lenders to provide for future real estate tax and 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 as a component of interest expense over the terms of the related borrowings using a method that approximates a level yield. Deferred financing costs, net of accumulated amortization, were approximately
$60.3 million
and
$62.2 million
at
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively. Amortized costs of approximately
$16.9 million
,
$13.5 million
and
$10.5 million
were included in interest expense for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, respectively.
Marketable Debt and Equity Securities
We record marketable debt and equity securities (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) as available-for-sale and classify them as a component of other assets 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
91
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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.
•
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
92
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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,
0.7866
shares of our common stock per unit, 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, 2014
and
2013
, this cumulative excess totaled
$188.0 million
(net of allowances of
$145.1 million
) and
$150.8 million
(net of allowances of
$101.4 million
), respectively.
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 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
93
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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.
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.
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, 2014
, 2013 and 2012, 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.”
94
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 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. ASU 2014-09 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2017. 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.
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, 2014
, Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred managed or operated approximately
23.6%
,
12.3%
,
10.2%
and
2.0%
, respectively, of our real estate investments based on gross book value (excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
). Seniors housing communities constituted approximately
65.5%
of our real estate investments based on gross book value (excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
), while MOBs, skilled nursing and other facilities, and hospitals collectively comprised the remaining
34.5%
Our properties were located in
46
states, the District of Columbia,
seven
Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom as of
December 31, 2014
, 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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
.
Triple-Net Leased Properties
For the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, approximately
5.5%
,
5.6%
and
6.3%
, respectively, of our total revenues and
9.2%
,
9.2%
and
10.5%
, 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
6.2%
,
8.1%
and
10.3%
, respectively, of our total revenues and
10.2%
,
13.4%
and
17.1%
, respectively, of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were derived from our lease agreements with Kindred. Each of our leases with Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred 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 these leases has guaranty and cross-default provisions tied to other leases with the same tenant or its affiliates, as well as bundled lease renewals.
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
. If either Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred 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 and Kindred 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 or Kindred 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 and Kindred 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.
95
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In July 2014, Brookdale Senior Living completed its acquisition of Emeritus Corporation (“Emeritus”), which operates
15
of our triple-net leased properties. In connection with the transaction, we entered into favorable arrangements with Brookdale Senior Living and Emeritus regarding the terms of our existing leases. The transaction and those arrangements have not had, nor do we expect them to have, a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations.
As of December 31, 2014, we had re-leased to Kindred, transitioned to new operators or sold
107
of the
108
licensed healthcare assets whose lease terms with Kindred were scheduled to expire on September 30, 2014. We expect to sell the remaining asset during 2015; however, this transaction remains subject to customary due diligence conditions, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully complete the sale on a timely basis or at all.
In December 2014, we entered into favorable agreements with Kindred to transition 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 will be 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, and Kindred has extensive and detailed obligations to cooperate and ensure an orderly transition of the properties to another operator.
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, 2014
(excluding properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
):
Brookdale
Senior
Living
Kindred
Other
Total
(In thousands)
2015
$
182,472
$
189,183
$
944,348
$
1,316,003
2016
182,625
181,470
911,457
1,275,552
2017
183,115
185,082
861,983
1,230,180
2018
183,321
154,440
822,930
1,160,691
2019
173,397
140,593
791,043
1,105,033
Thereafter
203,335
585,303
4,760,264
5,548,902
Total
$
1,108,265
$
1,436,071
$
9,092,025
$
11,636,361
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2014
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
269
of our 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 and Sunrise 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
96
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
Neither Atria nor Sunrise is currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria and Sunrise 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 or Sunrise, 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.
Note 4—Acquisitions of Real Estate Property
The following summarizes our acquisition and development activities during
2014
,
2013
and
2012
. 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.
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
.
97
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”), and have completed our initial accounting, which is subject to further adjustment. 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
1,081,207
1,628,056
Acquired lease intangibles
28,883
36,452
65,335
Other assets
227
12,387
12,614
Total assets acquired
621,545
1,230,327
1,851,872
Notes payable and other debt
12,927
228,150
241,077
Other liabilities
8,609
124,897
133,506
Total liabilities assumed
21,536
353,047
374,583
Net assets acquired
600,009
877,280
1,477,289
Cash acquired
227
8,704
8,931
Total cash used
$
599,782
$
868,576
$
1,468,358
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.
98
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estimated Fair Value
We accounted for our 2013 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC 805, and we have completed our accounting for these acquisitions. 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.
2012 Acquisitions
Funds Acquisition
In December 2012, we acquired 100% of certain private equity funds previously managed by Lazard Frères Real Estate Investments LLC (“LFREI”) or its affiliates. The acquired funds primarily owned a
34%
interest in Atria, which is recorded as an investment in unconsolidated entities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, and approximately
3.7 million
shares of our common stock. In conjunction with this acquisition, we also extinguished our obligation related to the “earnout,” a contingent performance-based payment arising out of our 2011 acquisition of the real estate assets of Atria Senior Living Group, Inc. (together with its affiliates, “ASLG”), for an additional
$44 million
. This amount represented the discounted net present value of the potential future payment, which was previously reflected on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as a liability.
Cogdell Acquisition
In April 2012, we acquired Cogdell Spencer Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Cogdell”), including its
71
real estate assets (including properties owned through joint ventures) and its MOB property management business, which had existing agreements with third parties to manage
44
MOBs, in an all-cash transaction. At closing, our investment in Cogdell, including our share of debt, was approximately
$760 million
and our joint venture partners’ share of net debt assumed was
$36.3 million
.
Pursuant to the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the agreement and plan of merger dated as of December 24, 2011, at the effective time of the merger, (a) each outstanding share of Cogdell common stock, and each outstanding unit of limited partnership interest in Cogdell’s operating partnership, Cogdell Spencer LP, that was not owned by subsidiaries of Cogdell was converted into the right to receive
$4.25
in cash, and (b) each outstanding share of Cogdell’s
8.500%
Series A Cumulative Redeemable Perpetual Preferred Stock was converted into the right to receive an amount in cash equal to
$25.00
, plus accrued and unpaid dividends through the date of closing. We funded the Cogdell acquisition through the assumption of
$203.8 million
of existing Cogdell mortgage debt (inclusive of our joint venture partners’ share of
$36.3 million
) and borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility. Prior to the closing, Cogdell completed the sale of its design-build and development business to an unaffiliated third party.
99
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Other 2012 Acquisitions
In May 2012, we acquired
16
seniors housing communities managed by Sunrise in an all-cash transaction. Sunrise continues to manage the acquired assets under existing long-term management agreements. During 2012, we also invested in
21
seniors housing communities,
two
skilled nursing facilities and
44
MOBs, including
36
MOBs that we had previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities. See “Note 7—Investments in Unconsolidated Entities.”
Completed Developments
During 2012, we completed the development of
three
MOBs and
two
seniors housing communities, representing
$116.9 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012.
Estimated Fair Value
We accounted for our 2012 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC 805, and we have completed our accounting for these acquisitions. The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in our 2012 real estate acquisitions, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations
MOB Operations (1)
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
21,881
$
60,662
$
112,504
$
195,047
Buildings and improvements
225,950
413,750
1,085,148
1,724,848
Construction in progress
—
—
25,579
25,579
Acquired lease intangibles
2,323
18,070
182,406
202,799
Other assets
1,519
832
43,747
46,098
Total assets acquired
251,673
493,314
1,449,384
2,194,371
Notes payable and other debt
57,219
—
355,606
412,825
Other liabilities
13,851
11,806
106,367
132,024
Total liabilities assumed
71,070
11,806
461,973
544,849
Noncontrolling interest assumed
7,292
—
30,361
37,653
Net assets acquired
173,311
481,508
957,050
1,611,869
Cash acquired
1,250
—
24,115
25,365
Total cash used
$
172,061
$
481,508
$
932,935
$
1,586,504
______________
(1) Includes the Cogdell acquisition.
HCT Acquisition
In January 2015, we acquired American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction, which added 152 properties (some of which are located on the same campus) 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 cancelled) 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
$740 million
of debt, net of HCT cash on hand.
For the year ended December 31, 2014, we incurred a total of
$8.8 million
of acquisition-related costs related to the HCT acquisition, all of which we expensed as incurred and included in merger-related expenses and deal costs on our Consolidated Statements of Income.
100
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 as of January 1, 2013.
For the Year Ended December 31, 2014
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues
$
3,369,214
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
483,585
Earnings per common share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.50
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
1.48
Weighted average shares used in computing earnings per common share:
Basic
322,590
Diluted
326,211
Acquisition-related costs related to the HCT acquisition 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, 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 occurred at the beginning of the periods presented, nor are they necessarily indicative of future operating results.
Other 2015 Acquisitions
In 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately
$320 million
, including the acquisition of
five
triple-net leased properties in the United Kingdom and
12
skilled nursing facilities.
Note 5—Dispositions
2014 Activity
During the year ended December 31, 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.
2012 Activity
During 2012, we sold
38
triple-net leased properties (
ten
of which were pursuant to the exercise of tenant purchase options) and
five
properties included in our MOB operations reportable business segment for aggregate consideration of
$346.1 million
, including fees of
$5.0 million
. We recognized a net gain on the sales of these assets of
$85.5 million
, all of which is reported within discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income. In June 2012, we declined to exercise our
101
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
renewal option on the operating leases (in which we were the tenant) related to
two
seniors housing communities we acquired as part of the ASLG acquisition that expired on June 30, 2012.
Discontinued Operations and Assets Held for Sale
We present separately, as discontinued operations in all periods presented, the results of operations for all real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
and all real estate assets disposed of during the three-year period then ended that meet the criteria of discontinued operations.
The table below summarizes our real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
and 2013, including the amounts reported within other assets and accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
December 31, 2014
December 31, 2013
Number of Properties Held for Sale (1)
Other Assets
Accounts Payable and Other Liabilities
Number of Properties Held for Sale (2)
Other Assets
Accounts Payable and Other Liabilities
(Dollars in thousands)
Triple-net leased properties
14
$
34,097
$
1,330
15
$
125,981
$
50,456
MOB operations (3)
36
176,366
48,895
4
29,359
14,044
Total
50
$
210,463
$
50,225
19
$
155,340
$
64,500
(1)
The operations for
three
triple-net leased properties and
two
MOBs are reported in discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
(2)
The operations for all properties listed are reported in discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
(3)
Includes
34
MOBs that are being marketed for sale and were classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
. Aggregate NOI for this portfolio of assets was
$11.9 million
,
$13.8 million
, and
$14.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
, and 2012 respectively. The sale of these MOBs does not meet the criteria for reporting as discontinued operations.
We recognized impairments of
$56.6 million
,
$51.5 million
and
$35.6 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and 2012 respectively, which are recorded primarily as a component of depreciation and amortization. A portion of these impairments (
$1.5 million
,
$39.7 million
, and
$13.9 million
, respectively) was recorded in discontinued operations for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
. For both 2014 and 2013, 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. In December 2014, we executed an agreement to sell
four
triple-net leased seniors housing assets for a sales price of
$20.0 million
. We recognized a
$30.6 million
impairment loss on these assets, as the assets’ carrying amount of
$49.5 million
exceeded the estimated fair value (less costs to sell) of
$19.0 million
.
102
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Set forth below is a summary of our results of operations for properties within discontinued operations for the three years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
.
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
4,331
$
14,060
$
34,840
Resident fees and services
—
759
6,435
Interest and other income
750
—
5,052
5,081
14,819
46,327
Expenses:
Interest
1,714
5,472
13,314
Depreciation and amortization
1,555
47,806
49,807
Property-level operating expenses
507
1,994
7,971
General, administrative and professional fees
—
3
303
Gain on extinguishment of debt, net
—
(153
)
—
Other
412
(407
)
1,902
4,188
54,715
73,297
Income (loss) before income taxes and gain on real estate dispositions
893
(39,896
)
(26,970
)
Income tax benefit
—
—
4
Gain on real estate dispositions
1,213
3,617
80,952
Discontinued operations
$
2,106
$
(36,279
)
$
53,986
Note 6—Loans Receivable and Investments
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, we had
$927.7 million
and
$414.8 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, 2014
and
2013
, including amortized cost, fair value and unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale investments:
December 31, 2014
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain (Loss)
(In thousands)
Secured mortgage loans and other
$
766,641
$
766,641
$
774,789
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
63,115
61,377
63,115
1,738
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
829,756
828,018
837,904
1,738
Unsecured loans receivable
21,862
21,862
23,164
—
Marketable securities
76,046
71,000
76,046
5,046
Total investments reported as Other assets
97,908
92,862
99,210
5,046
Total net loans receivable and investments
$
927,664
$
920,880
$
937,114
$
6,784
103
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
December 31, 2013
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain (Loss)
(In thousands)
Secured mortgage loans and other
$
354,775
$
354,775
$
355,223
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
21,454
21,671
21,454
(217
)
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
376,229
376,446
376,677
(217
)
Unsecured loans receivable
38,542
38,542
40,473
—
Total investments reported as Other assets
38,542
38,542
40,473
—
Total net loans receivable and investments
$
414,771
$
414,988
$
417,150
$
(217
)
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
. Our investments in marketable debt securities and government-sponsored pooled loans are classified as available-for-sale, with contractual maturity dates in 2022 and 2023.
During the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$55.9 million
in final repayment of
three
secured and
two
unsecured 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
.
In 2013, we sold portions of a
$375.0 million
secured loan receivable to third parties in separate transactions, as evidenced by separate notes. As of
December 31, 2014
, our remaining investment in this loan receivable was
$174.8 million
, which bears interest at an all-in rate of
10.6%
per annum. Under the terms of the loan agreement, we act as the administrative agent and will continue to receive the stated interest rate on our remaining loan receivable balance.
During 2013, we received aggregate proceeds of
$102.3 million
in final repayment of
seven
secured and
three
unsecured loans receivable and recognized aggregate gains of
$5.1 million
.
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, 2014
and
2013
, we had ownership interests (ranging from
5%
to
25%
) in joint ventures that owned
51
properties and
52
properties, respectively. We account for our interests in these joint ventures, as well as our
34%
interest in Atria, under the equity method of accounting.
With the exception of our interest in Atria, we provide various services to each unconsolidated entity in exchange for fees and reimbursements. Total management fees earned in connection with these entities were
$8.4 million
,
$7.0 million
and
$7.3 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, respectively (which is included in Medical office building and other services revenue in our Consolidated Statements of Income).
In March 2013, we acquired
two
MOBs for aggregate consideration of approximately
$55.6 million
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.
In August 2012, we acquired
36
MOBs (plus one MOB that was being marketed for sale and has since been sold) from joint venture entities in which we had interests ranging between
5%
and
20%
and accounted for as equity method investments. We acquired these MOBs for approximately
$350.0 million
, including the assumption of
$101.6 million
in debt. In connection with this acquisition, we re-measured our previously held equity interests and recognized a net gain of
$16.6 million
, which is
104
Table of Contents
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.
Note 8—Intangibles
The following is a summary of our intangibles as of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
December 31, 2014
December 31, 2013
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
$
210,573
8.2
$
214,353
8.4
In-place and other lease intangibles
829,078
23.9
795,829
24.1
Goodwill and other intangibles
489,384
7.9
489,346
8.6
Accumulated amortization
(549,026
)
N/A
(458,919
)
N/A
Net intangible assets
$
980,009
19.9
$
1,040,609
19.8
Intangible liabilities:
Below market lease intangibles
$
425,092
14.7
$
429,199
14.7
Other lease intangibles
32,103
26.1
32,103
24.8
Accumulated amortization
(158,480
)
N/A
(119,549
)
N/A
Purchase option intangibles
22,900
N/A
29,294
N/A
Net intangible liabilities
$
321,615
15.2
$
371,047
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. Goodwill and 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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, our net amortization expense related to these intangibles was
$51.2 million
,
$65.2 million
and
$123.3 million
, respectively. The estimated net amortization expense related to these intangibles for each of the next five years is as follows:
2015
—
$58.8 million
;
2016
—
$29.1 million
;
2017
—
$16.2 million
;
2018
—
$10.0 million
; and
2019
—
$5.7 million
.
Note 9—Other Assets
The following is a summary of our other assets as of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
:
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Straight-line rent receivables, net
$
187,969
$
150,829
Unsecured loans receivable, net
21,862
38,542
Goodwill and other intangibles, net
472,052
476,483
Assets held for sale
210,463
155,340
Marketable securities
76,046
—
Other
163,145
125,141
Total other assets
$
1,131,537
$
946,335
105
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, 2014
and
2013
:
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Unsecured revolving credit facility (1)
$
919,099
$
376,343
3.125% Senior Notes due 2015
400,000
400,000
6% Senior Notes due 2015
234,420
234,420
1.55% Senior Notes due 2016
550,000
550,000
1.250% Senior Notes due 2017
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)
790,634
800,702
4.00% Senior Notes due 2019
600,000
600,000
3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019 (3)
344,204
—
2.700% Senior Notes due 2020
500,000
500,000
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
3.750% Senior Notes due 2024
400,000
—
4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024 (3)
215,128
—
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
Mortgage loans and other (4)
2,284,763
2,524,889
Total
10,872,371
9,320,477
Unamortized fair value adjustment
41,853
69,611
Unamortized discounts
(26,132
)
(25,096
)
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
10,888,092
$
9,364,992
_______
(1)
$164.1 million
and
$7.3 million
of aggregate borrowings are denominated in Canadian dollars as of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively.
(2)
These amounts represent in aggregate the approximate
$1.0 billion
of unsecured term loan borrowings under our unsecured credit facility, of which
$107.0 million
of borrowings included in the 2019 tranche are denominated in Canadian dollar borrowings.
(3)
These senior notes are denominated in Canadian dollars.
(4)
2014 excludes
$43.5 million
of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
that is included in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheet. 2013 excludes
$13.1 million
of mortgage debt that is included in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheet.
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, 2014
, 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, 2014
. 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
.
106
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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, 2014
, we had
$919.1 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$13.3 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$1.1 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
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, 2014
, we had outstanding
$5.8 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership (“Ventas Realty”) (
$4.3 billion
of which was co-issued by Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation), approximately
$309.8 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
650.0 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 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.
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.
107
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In December 2012, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$700.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.00%
senior notes due 2018 at a public offering price equal to
99.739%
of par, for total proceeds of
$698.2 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In August 2012, Ventas Realty initially issued and sold
$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.25%
senior notes due 2022 (the “2022 Notes”) at a public offering price equal to
99.027%
of par, for total proceeds of
$272.3 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses. In December 2012, Ventas Realty issued and sold an additional
$225.0 million
principal amount of 2022 Notes at a public offering price equal to
98.509%
of par, for total proceeds of
$221.6 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In April 2012, Ventas Realty issued and sold $
600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.00%
senior notes due 2019 at a public offering price equal to
99.489%
of par, for total proceeds of
$596.9 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In February 2012, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$600.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.25%
senior notes due 2022 at a public offering price equal to
99.214%
of par, for total proceeds of
$595.3 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
During 2012, we repaid in full, at par,
$155.4 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
9%
senior notes due 2012 and our
8.25%
senior notes due 2012 upon maturity, and we redeemed: all
$225.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our 6¾% senior notes due 2017 at a redemption price equal to
103.375%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date; and all
$200.0 million
principal amount then outstanding of our 6½% senior notes due 2016 at a redemption price equal to
103.25%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, in each case pursuant to the terms of the applicable indenture governing the notes. As a result of these redemptions, we recognized a total loss on extinguishment of debt of
$39.7 million
.
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, 2014
, we had
160
mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$2.3 billion
and secured by
178
of our properties. Of these loans,
143
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$1.8 billion
bear interest at fixed rates ranging from
3.6%
to
8.6%
per annum, and
17
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$474.0 million
bear
108
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
interest at variable rates ranging from
0.7%
to
3.5%
per annum as of
December 31, 2014
. At
December 31, 2014
, the weighted average annual rate on our fixed rate mortgage loans was
5.9%
, and the weighted average annual rate on our variable rate mortgage loans was
2.3%
. Our mortgage loans had a weighted average maturity of
5.6
years as of
December 31, 2014
.
During 2014, we assumed or originated 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 originated 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.
During 2012, we assumed mortgage debt of
$380.3 million
and repaid in full mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$344.2 million
, and recognized a gain on extinguishment of debt of
$2.1 million
in connection with these repayments.
Scheduled Maturities of Borrowing Arrangements and Other Provisions
As of
December 31, 2014
, our indebtedness had the following maturities:
Principal Amount
Due at Maturity
Unsecured Revolving
Credit
Facility(1)
Scheduled Periodic
Amortization
Total Maturities
(In thousands)
2015 (2)
$
704,082
$
—
$
41,765
$
745,847
2016 (2)
861,817
—
37,913
899,730
2017 (2)
777,127
—
27,500
804,627
2018 (2)
1,075,209
919,099
21,585
2,015,893
2019
2,294,979
—
13,985
2,308,964
Thereafter (3)
3,952,366
—
144,944
4,097,310
Total maturities
$
9,665,580
$
919,099
$
287,692
$
10,872,371
(1)
At
December 31, 2014
, we had
$55.3 million
of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, for
$863.8 million
of net borrowings outstanding under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
(2)
Excludes
$43.5 million
of mortgage debt related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2014
that is scheduled to mature between 2015 and 2018.
(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, 2014
, 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
109
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
As of
December 31, 2014
, our variable rate debt obligations of
$2.4 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$153.6 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with a maturity of March 21, 2016 that effectively convert fixed rate debt to variable rate debt. As of
December 31, 2014
, our fixed rate debt obligations of
$8.5 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$59.0 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from March 2, 2015 to April 1, 2019, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt.
Unamortized Fair Value Adjustment
As of
December 31, 2014
, the unamortized fair value adjustment related to the long-term debt we assumed in connection with various acquisitions was
$41.9 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
$20.6 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2014
and for each of the next five years will be as follows:
2015
—
$13.6 million
;
2016
—
$9.2 million
;
2017
—
$5.4 million
;
2018
—
$2.1 million
; and
2019
—
$1.5 million
.
Note 11—Fair Values of Financial Instruments
As of
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, the carrying amounts and fair values of our financial instruments were as follows:
2014
2013
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
(In thousands)
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
$
55,348
$
55,348
$
94,816
$
94,816
Secured loans receivable, net
766,641
774,789
354,775
355,223
Unsecured loans receivable, net
21,862
23,164
38,542
40,473
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
63,115
63,115
21,454
21,454
Marketable securities
76,046
76,046
—
—
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt, gross
10,872,371
11,197,131
9,320,477
9,405,259
Derivative instruments and other liabilities
2,743
2,743
11,230
11,230
Redeemable OP unitholder interests
159,134
159,134
111,607
111,607
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, 2014
, 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
110
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, 2014
were as follows:
•
Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
500,000
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
500,000
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2014
.
•
Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
500,000
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
411,745
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2014
.
•
2012 Incentive Plan—
8,836,614
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
7,170,536
shares (plus the number of shares or options outstanding under the 2006 Plans as of December 31, 2014 that were or are subsequently forfeited or expire unexercised) were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2014
.
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.
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:
2014
2013
2012
Risk-free interest rate
1.3 - 1.4%
0.59 - 0.63%
0.68 - 1.39%
Dividend yield
5.00
%
5.00
%
6.75
%
Volatility factors of the expected market price for our common stock
17.8 - 18.0%
24.2 - 31.7%
35.9 - 42.9%
Weighted average expected life of options
4.17 years
4.17 years
4.25 - 7.0 years
The following is a summary of stock option activity in
2014
:
Shares
Range of Exercise
Prices
Weighted Average
Exercise Price
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life (years)
Intrinsic
Value
($000’s)
Outstanding as of December 31, 2013
2,258,763
$21.57- $73.20
$
51.59
Options granted
918,225
60.50 - 61.60
61.37
Options exercised
(634,299
)
21.57 - 70.34
41.26
Options forfeited
(82,061
)
55.39 - 73.20
65.10
Outstanding as of December 31, 2014
2,460,628
28.96 - 70.34
57.45
7.3
$
35,068
Exercisable as of December 31, 2014
1,670,864
$28.96 - $70.34
$
54.99
6.6
$
27,921
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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
were
$4.7 million
,
$4.5 million
and
$4.4 million
, respectively. The total intrinsic value at the vesting date of options vested during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 was
$0.7 million
,
$3.0 million
and
$1.8 million
, respectively.
111
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of the status of our nonvested stock options as of
December 31, 2014
and changes during the year then ended follows:
Shares
Weighted Average
Grant Date Fair
Value
Nonvested at beginning of year
534,686
$
9.54
Granted
918,225
4.37
Vested
(594,751
)
7.30
Forfeited
(68,396
)
6.35
Nonvested at end of year
789,764
$
5.49
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$1.5 million
of total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested stock options granted under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.2
years. Aggregate proceeds received from options exercised under the Plans or the NHP Plan for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
were
$26.2 million
,
$7.2 million
and
$21.5 million
, respectively. The total intrinsic value at exercise of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 was
$19.3 million
,
$4.0 million
and
$14.7 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
$16.2 million
in
2014
,
$16.1 million
in
2013
and
$16.4 million
in
2012
. 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.
A summary of the status of our nonvested restricted stock and restricted stock units as of
December 31, 2014
, and changes during the year ended
December 31, 2014
follows:
Restricted
Stock
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Restricted
Stock Units
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Nonvested at December 31, 2013
509,116
$
56.66
7,516
$
60.80
Granted
207,182
61.60
9,076
57.28
Vested
(282,448
)
57.41
(5,155
)
59.10
Forfeited
(31,109
)
58.74
(45
)
53.74
Nonvested at December 31, 2014
402,741
$
58.51
11,392
$
58.79
As of
December 31, 2014
, we had
$10.7 million
of unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested restricted stock and restricted stock units under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.6
years. The total fair value at the vesting date for restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 was
$17.7 million
,
$16.9 million
and
$17.5 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
2,500,000
shares for issuance under the ESPP. As of
December 31, 2014
,
69,395
shares had been purchased under the ESPP and
2,430,605
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
2014
, we made contributions for each qualifying employee of up to
3.5%
of his or her salary, subject to certain limitations. During
2014
,
2013
and
2012
, our aggregate contributions were approximately
$1,136,000
,
$1,036,000
and
$768,000
, respectively.
112
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, our tax treatment of distributions per common share was as follows:
2014
2013
2012
Tax treatment of distributions:
Ordinary income
$
2.61271
$
2.65787
$
2.23124
Qualified ordinary income
0.10474
0.03718
—
Long-term capital gain
0.16224
0.03995
0.18884
Unrecaptured Section 1250 gain
0.08531
—
0.05992
Distribution reported for 1099-DIV purposes
$
2.96500
$
2.73500
$
2.48000
We believe we have met the annual REIT distribution requirement by payment of at least
90%
of our estimated taxable income for
2014
,
2013
and
2012
. Our consolidated benefit for income taxes for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
was as follows:
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Current - Federal and state
$
878
$
2,684
$
1,208
Deferred - Federal and state
(5,110
)
(14,256
)
(6,789
)
Current - Foreign
327
—
—
Deferred - Foreign
(4,827
)
(256
)
(701
)
Total
$
(8,732
)
$
(11,828
)
$
(6,282
)
The income tax benefit for the year ended
December 31, 2014
is due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses and restructuring related to certain TRS entities. The income tax benefit for the year ended
December 31, 2013
primarily relates to the release of valuation allowances against certain deferred tax assets of our TRS entities.
Although the TRS entities have paid minimal cash federal income taxes for the year ended
December 31, 2014
, 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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, to the income tax benefit is as follows:
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Tax at statutory rate on earnings from continuing operations before unconsolidated entities, noncontrolling interest and income taxes
$
156,981
$
167,947
$
99,174
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
(1,152
)
(1,857
)
(842
)
Increase in valuation allowance
23,122
7,145
33,577
Increase (decrease) in ASC 740 income tax liability
878
2,805
656
Tax at statutory rate on earnings not subject to federal income taxes
(185,290
)
(187,416
)
(138,687
)
Foreign rate differential and foreign taxes
3,230
—
—
Change in tax status of TRS
(7,380
)
—
—
Other differences
879
(452
)
(160
)
Income tax expense (benefit)
$
(8,732
)
$
(11,828
)
$
(6,282
)
113
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The REIT made minimal state and foreign income tax payments and no Federal income tax payments for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
.
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). 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.
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, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
are summarized as follows:
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Property, primarily differences in depreciation and amortization, the tax basis of land assets and the treatment of interests and certain costs
$
(406,023
)
$
(309,775
)
$
(310,756
)
Operating loss and interest deduction carryforwards
398,859
377,645
366,590
Expense accruals and other
15,355
13,421
13,984
Valuation allowance
(352,528
)
(331,458
)
(326,837
)
Net deferred tax liabilities (1)
$
(344,337
)
$
(250,167
)
$
(257,019
)
(1)
Includes approximately
$0 million
,
$0 million
and
$2.7 million
, respectively, of deferred tax assets included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Due to uncertainty regarding the realization of certain deferred tax assets, we have established valuation allowances, primarily in connection with the NOL carryforward related to the REIT.
A rollforward of valuation allowances, for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, is as follows:
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
331,458
$
326,837
$
281,954
Additions:
Purchase accounting
—
613
3,987
Expenses
28,364
31,540
41,445
Subtractions:
Deductions
(2,344
)
(23,622
)
(3,611
)
Other activity (not resulting in expense or deduction)
(4,950
)
(3,910
)
3,062
Ending balance
$
352,528
$
331,458
$
326,837
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. Our net deferred tax liability
decreased
$6.9 million
during
2013
primarily due to the reversal of valuation allowances against deferred tax assets.
For the years ended December 31,
2014
and
2013
, the net difference between tax bases and the reported amount of REIT assets and liabilities for federal income tax purposes was approximately
$4.1 billion
and
$4.7 billion
, respectively, less than the book bases of those assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes.
We are subject to corporate level taxes for any asset dispositions during the
ten
-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.
114
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Generally, we are subject to audit under the statute of limitations by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the year ended December 31, 2011 and subsequent years and are subject to audit by state taxing authorities for the year ended December 31, 2010 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 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, 2014
, we had a combined NOL carryforward of
$363.2 million
related to the TRS entities and an NOL carryforward of
$717.3 million
related to the REIT. 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 and ASLG NOL 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 2016 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, 2014
and
2013
. 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:
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Balance as of January 1
$
21,906
$
19,466
Additions to tax positions related to the current year
4,507
3,901
Additions to tax positions related to prior years
126
—
Subtractions to tax positions related to prior years
(129
)
(513
)
Subtractions to tax positions related to settlements
—
—
Subtractions to tax positions as a result of the lapse of the statute of limitations
(964
)
(948
)
Balance as of December 31
$
25,446
$
21,906
Included in these unrecognized tax benefits of
$25.4 million
and
$21.9 million
at
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, respectively, were
$23.9 million
and
$20.4 million
of tax benefits at
December 31, 2014
and
2013
, 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
2014
, but no penalties. We expect our unrecognized tax benefits to decrease by
$1.0 million
during
2015
.
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, 2014
were
$33.3 million
in
2015
,
$29.6 million
in
2016
,
$22.7 million
in
2017
,
$18.4 million
in
2018
,
$15.3 million
in
2019
, and
$509.2 million
thereafter.
115
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,
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Numerator for basic and diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
473,661
$
489,788
$
308,814
Discontinued operations
2,106
(36,279
)
53,986
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
453,509
$
362,800
Denominator:
Denominator for basic earnings per share—weighted average shares
294,175
292,654
292,064
Effect of dilutive securities:
Stock options
495
534
496
Restricted stock awards
55
99
92
OP units
1,952
1,823
1,836
Denominator for diluted earnings per share—adjusted weighted average shares
296,677
295,110
294,488
Basic earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
1.61
$
1.67
$
1.06
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.12
)
0.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.62
$
1.55
$
1.24
Diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
1.59
$
1.66
$
1.05
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.12
)
0.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1.60
$
1.54
$
1.23
There were
479,291
,
504,815
and
372,440
anti-dilutive options outstanding for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
and
2012
, 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 state court action agreed to a memorandum of understanding regarding settlement of all claims asserted on behalf of each alleged class of HCT stockholders. In connection with the settlement contemplated by that memorandum of understanding, each action and all claims asserted therein will be dismissed, subject to approval by each applicable court. 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. The memorandum of understanding further contemplates that the parties will enter into a stipulation of settlement, which will be subject to customary conditions, including confirmatory discovery and court approval following notice to HCT’s stockholders. If the parties enter into a stipulation of settlement, a hearing will be scheduled at which the court will consider the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will ultimately enter into a stipulation
116
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
of settlement, that the applicable court will approve any proposed settlement, or that any eventual settlement will be under the same terms as those contemplated by the memorandum of understanding.
On January 5, 2015, the parties to the federal action also agreed to a memorandum of understanding regarding settlement of all claims asserted on behalf of each alleged class of HCT stockholders. In connection with the settlement contemplated by that memorandum of understanding, each action and all claims asserted therein will be dismissed, subject to approval by each applicable court. 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 5, 2015. The memorandum of understanding further contemplates that the parties will enter into a stipulation of settlement, which will be subject to customary conditions, including confirmatory discovery and court approval following notice to HCT’s stockholders. If the parties enter into a stipulation of settlement, a hearing will be scheduled at which the court will consider the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will ultimately enter into a stipulation of settlement, that the applicable court will approve any proposed settlement, or that any eventual settlement will be under the same terms as those contemplated by the memorandum of understanding.
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.
117
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 17—Permanent and Temporary Equity
Capital Stock
In March 2013, we established an “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program through which we may sell from time to time up to an aggregate of
$750 million
of our common stock. For the year ended
December 31, 2014
, we issued and sold a total of
3,381,678
shares of common stock under the program for aggregate net proceeds of
$242.3 million
(all of which was received in the fourth quarter of 2014), after sales agent commissions of
$3.7 million
. As of
December 31, 2014
, approximately
$360.4 million
of our common stock remained available for sale under our ATM equity offering program.
In January 2015, we issued and sold an additional
3,750,202
shares of common stock under the ATM for aggregate net proceeds of
$285.8 million
, after sales agent commissions of
$4.4 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
.
In December 2012, through our acquisition of certain private equity funds, we acquired
3.7 million
shares of our common stock that we subsequently canceled in February 2014. See “Note 4—Acquisitions of Real Estate Property.”
In June 2012, we completed the public offering and sale of
5,980,000
shares of our common stock for
$342.5 million
in aggregate proceeds.
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.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
The following is a summary of our accumulated other comprehensive income as of December 31, 2014 and 2013:
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Foreign currency translation
$
866
$
18,019
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities
6,785
(216
)
Other
5,470
1,856
Total accumulated other comprehensive income
$
13,121
$
19,659
118
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interest
The following is a rollforward of our redeemable OP unitholder interests and noncontrolling interests for 2014:
Redeemable OP Unitholder Interests
Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests
Total Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
(In thousands)
Balance as of December 31, 2013
$
111,607
$
45,053
$
156,660
New issuances
20,643
—
20,643
Change in valuation
33,062
(4,020
)
29,042
Distributions and other
(5,757
)
(1,982
)
(7,739
)
Redemptions
(421
)
(26,169
)
(26,590
)
Balance as of December 31, 2014
$
159,134
$
12,882
$
172,016
Note 18—Related Party Transactions
We own an MOB located on the Sutter Medical Center-Castro Valley campus that is subject to a ground lease from Sutter Health and is
100%
leased by Sutter Health pursuant to long-term triple-net leases. We received
$2.2 million
and
$2.1 million
of base rent from Sutter Health for this MOB in 2014 and 2013, respectively. In 2014, we acquired an interest in another MOB (through our investment in an unconsolidated joint venture entity) that is
100%
leased by Sutter Health. Our unconsolidated joint venture entity received
$0.8 million
of base rent from Sutter Health for this MOB in 2014. Robert D. Reed, who was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Sutter Health until his retirement on January 1, 2015, has served as a member of our Board of Directors since March 2008.
Upon consummation of the ASLG acquisition in May 2011, we entered into long-term management agreements with Atria to operate the acquired assets. During 2012, we paid Atria
$33.9 million
in management fees under our agreements. Matthew J. Lustig, a member of our Board of Directors since May 2011, served as Chairman of Atria until our acquisition of certain private equity funds on December 21, 2012 (see “Note 4—Acquisitions of Real Estate Property”) and is employed by affiliates of LFREI.
119
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 19—Quarterly Financial Information (Unaudited)
Summarized unaudited consolidated quarterly information for the years ended
December 31, 2014
and
2013
is provided below.
For the Year Ended December 31, 2014
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues
$
741,470
$
751,254
$
779,035
$
803,987
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
118,016
$
138,653
$
109,391
$
107,601
Discontinued operations
3,031
(255
)
(259
)
(411
)
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
$
0.40
$
0.47
$
0.37
$
0.36
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.00
)
(0.00
)
(0.00
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.47
$
0.37
$
0.36
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, including real estate dispositions
$
0.40
$
0.47
$
0.37
$
0.36
Discontinued operations
0.01
(0.00
)
(0.00
)
(0.00
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.47
$
0.37
$
0.36
Dividends declared per share
$
0.725
$
0.725
$
0.725
$
0.79
120
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues (1)
$
682,909
$
684,109
$
711,249
$
733,185
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders (1)
$
120,624
$
133,139
$
127,470
$
108,555
Discontinued operations (1)
(8,431
)
(18,559
)
(9,174
)
(115
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
112,193
$
114,580
$
118,296
$
108,440
Earnings per share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.45
$
0.43
$
0.37
Discontinued operations
(0.03
)
(0.06
)
(0.03
)
(0.00
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.38
$
0.39
$
0.40
$
0.37
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders
$
0.41
$
0.45
$
0.43
$
0.37
Discontinued operations
(0.03
)
(0.06
)
(0.03
)
(0.00
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
0.38
$
0.39
$
0.40
$
0.37
Dividends declared per share
$
0.67
$
0.67
$
0.67
$
0.725
________________________
(1)
The amounts presented for the three months ended March 31,
2013
, June 30,
2013
, September 30,
2013
and
December 31, 2013
differ from the amounts previously reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2013
as a result of properties previously included in discontinued operations as of
December 31, 2013
.
For the Three Months Ended
March 31,
2013
June 30,
2013
September 30,
2013
December 31,
2013
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
682,509
$
683,764
$
710,924
$
732,856
Revenues, previously reported in discontinued operations in Form 10-K
400
345
325
329
Total revenues disclosed in Form 10-K
$
682,909
$
684,109
$
711,249
$
733,185
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
120,429
$
132,895
$
127,268
$
108,338
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders, previously reported in discontinued operations in Form 10-K
195
244
202
217
Income from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders disclosed in Form 10-K
$
120,624
$
133,139
$
127,470
$
108,555
Discontinued operations, previously reported in Form 10-K
$
(8,236
)
$
(18,315
)
$
(8,972
)
$
102
Operations from properties previously reported in discontinued operations in Form 10-K
(195
)
(244
)
(202
)
(217
)
Discontinued operations disclosed in Form 10-K
$
(8,431
)
$
(18,559
)
$
(9,174
)
$
(115
)
121
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 20—Segment Information
As of
December 31, 2014
, 2013 and 2012 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.
122
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Summary information by reportable business segment is as follows:
For the year ended
December 31, 2014
:
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
MOB
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
970,377
$
—
$
463,618
$
—
$
1,433,995
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
—
—
—
55,169
55,169
Interest and other income
—
—
—
4,267
4,267
Total revenues
$
974,942
$
1,552,951
$
486,147
$
61,706
$
3,075,746
Total revenues
$
974,942
$
1,552,951
$
486,147
$
61,706
$
3,075,746
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
4,267
4,267
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,036,556
158,542
—
1,195,098
Medical office building services costs
—
—
17,092
—
17,092
Segment NOI
974,942
516,395
310,513
57,439
1,859,289
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
859
(658
)
398
(738
)
(139
)
Segment profit
$
975,801
$
515,737
$
310,911
$
56,701
1,859,150
Interest and other income
4,267
Interest expense
(376,842
)
Depreciation and amortization
(826,911
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(121,746
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(5,564
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(45,051
)
Other
(38,925
)
Income tax benefit
8,732
Discontinued operations
2,106
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
Net income
$
477,186
123
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
$
877,276
$
—
$
450,107
$
—
$
1,327,383
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
—
—
—
58,208
58,208
Interest and other income
—
—
—
2,047
2,047
Total revenues
$
881,745
$
1,406,005
$
462,184
$
61,518
$
2,811,452
Total revenues
$
881,745
$
1,406,005
$
462,184
$
61,518
$
2,811,452
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
2,047
2,047
Property-level operating expenses
—
956,684
152,948
—
1,109,632
Medical office building services costs
—
—
8,315
—
8,315
Segment NOI
881,745
449,321
300,921
59,471
1,691,458
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
475
(1,980
)
1,451
(454
)
(508
)
Segment profit
$
882,220
$
447,341
$
302,372
$
59,017
1,690,950
Interest and other income
2,047
Interest expense
(334,909
)
Depreciation and amortization
(722,075
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(115,106
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(1,201
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(21,634
)
Other
(18,732
)
Income tax benefit
11,828
Discontinued operations
(36,279
)
Net income
$
454,889
124
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the year ended
December 31, 2012
:
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
MOB
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
819,882
$
—
$
360,849
$
—
$
1,180,731
Resident fees and services
—
1,227,124
—
—
1,227,124
Medical office building and other services revenue
4,438
—
16,303
—
20,741
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
39,913
39,913
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,106
1,106
Total revenues
$
824,320
$
1,227,124
$
377,152
$
41,019
$
2,469,615
Total revenues
$
824,320
$
1,227,124
$
377,152
$
41,019
$
2,469,615
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,106
1,106
Property-level operating expenses
—
841,022
125,400
—
966,422
Medical office building services costs
—
—
9,883
—
9,883
Segment NOI
824,320
386,102
241,869
39,913
1,492,204
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
1,313
(48
)
16,889
—
18,154
Segment profit
$
825,633
$
386,054
$
258,758
$
39,913
1,510,358
Interest and other income
1,106
Interest expense
(288,717
)
Depreciation and amortization
(714,967
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(98,510
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(37,640
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(63,183
)
Other
(6,940
)
Income tax benefit
6,282
Discontinued operations
53,986
Net income
$
361,775
Assets by reportable business segment are as follows:
As of December 31,
2014
2013
(Dollars in thousands)
Assets:
Triple-net leased properties
$
9,176,159
43.2
%
$
8,919,360
45.2
%
Senior living operations
7,421,924
35.0
6,648,754
33.7
MOB operations
3,526,217
16.6
3,701,344
18.8
All other assets
1,101,871
5.2
462,036
2.3
Total assets
$
21,226,171
100.0
%
$
19,731,494
100.0
%
125
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,
2014
2013
2012 (1)
(In thousands)
Capital expenditures:
Triple-net leased properties
$
647,870
$
847,945
$
139,680
Senior living operations
977,997
576,459
758,371
MOB operations
36,861
189,953
1,003,865
Total capital expenditures
$
1,662,728
$
1,614,357
$
1,901,916
(1)
Includes funds held in a Code Section 1031 exchange escrow account with a qualified intermediary as follows: triple-net leased –
$58.1 million
; senior living –
$64.7 million
; and MOB –
$11.2 million
.
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,
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Revenues:
United States
$
2,935,524
$
2,718,234
$
2,373,646
Canada
126,435
93,218
95,969
United Kingdom
13,787
—
—
Total revenues
$
3,075,746
$
2,811,452
$
2,469,615
As of December 31,
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Net real estate property:
United States
$
17,547,255
$
17,705,962
Canada
1,269,710
369,624
United Kingdom
168,594
—
Total net real estate property
$
18,985,559
$
18,075,586
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.
126
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
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, 2014
and
2013
and for the years ended
December 31, 2014
,
2013
, and
2012
:
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
$
5,515
$
355,803
$
19,545,869
$
—
$
19,907,187
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
759
50,669
8,900
—
60,328
Investment in and advances to affiliates
10,827,772
3,466,998
—
(14,294,770
)
—
Other assets
103,534
57,912
970,091
—
1,131,537
Total assets
$
10,964,539
$
3,932,806
$
20,623,596
$
(14,294,770
)
$
21,226,171
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
7,422,975
$
3,465,117
$
—
$
10,888,092
Intercompany loans
5,555,128
(5,586,891
)
31,763
—
—
Accrued interest
—
43,212
18,885
—
62,097
Accounts payable and other liabilities
105,037
83,158
817,037
—
1,005,232
Deferred income taxes
344,337
—
—
—
344,337
Total liabilities
6,004,502
1,962,454
4,332,802
—
12,299,758
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
172,016
—
172,016
Total equity
4,960,037
1,970,352
16,118,778
(14,294,770
)
8,754,397
Total liabilities and equity
$
10,964,539
$
3,932,806
$
20,623,596
$
(14,294,770
)
$
21,226,171
(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.
127
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
As of
December 31, 2013
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
7,009
$
374,590
$
18,161,872
$
—
$
18,543,471
Cash and cash equivalents
28,169
—
66,647
—
94,816
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
2,104
1,211
81,342
—
84,657
Deferred financing costs, net
758
54,022
7,435
—
62,215
Investment in and advances to affiliates
10,481,466
3,201,998
—
(13,683,464
)
—
Other assets
29,450
14,102
902,783
—
946,335
Total assets
$
10,548,956
$
3,645,923
$
19,220,079
$
(13,683,464
)
$
19,731,494
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
6,336,240
$
3,028,752
$
—
$
9,364,992
Intercompany loans
4,247,853
(4,682,119
)
434,266
—
—
Accrued interest
—
39,561
14,788
—
54,349
Accounts payable and other liabilities
94,495
28,152
878,868
—
1,001,515
Deferred income taxes
250,167
—
—
—
250,167
Total liabilities
4,592,515
1,721,834
4,356,674
—
10,671,023
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
156,660
—
156,660
Total equity
5,956,441
1,924,089
14,706,745
(13,683,464
)
8,903,811
Total liabilities and equity
$
10,548,956
$
3,645,923
$
19,220,079
$
(13,683,464
)
$
19,731,494
(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.
128
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
$
282,174
$
1,149,032
$
—
$
1,433,995
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
—
52,117
—
55,169
Equity earnings in affiliates
480,273
—
281
(480,554
)
—
Interest and other income
3,314
26
927
—
4,267
Total revenues
489,428
282,200
2,784,672
(480,554
)
3,075,746
Expenses:
Interest
(18,209
)
197,704
197,347
—
376,842
Depreciation and amortization
5,860
32,736
788,315
—
826,911
Property-level operating expenses
1
481
1,194,616
—
1,195,098
Medical office building services costs
—
—
17,092
—
17,092
General, administrative and professional fees
3,910
20,569
97,267
—
121,746
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(3
)
3
5,564
—
5,564
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
27,841
2,110
15,100
—
45,051
Other
22,169
488
16,268
—
38,925
Total expenses
41,569
254,091
2,331,569
—
2,627,229
Income before income (loss) from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
447,859
28,109
453,103
(480,554
)
448,517
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
1,250
(1,389
)
—
(139
)
Income tax benefit (expense)
8,732
—
—
—
8,732
Income from continuing operations
456,591
29,359
451,714
(480,554
)
457,110
Discontinued operations
1,206
(1,198
)
2,098
—
2,106
Gain on real estate dispositions
17,970
—
—
—
17,970
Net income
475,767
28,161
453,812
(480,554
)
477,186
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,419
—
1,419
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
475,767
$
28,161
$
452,393
$
(480,554
)
$
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.
129
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
$
278,288
$
1,046,609
$
—
$
1,327,383
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
56,038
—
58,208
Equity earnings in affiliates
449,678
—
800
(450,478
)
—
Interest and other income
2,963
26
(942
)
—
2,047
Total revenues
456,389
279,211
2,526,330
(450,478
)
2,811,452
Expenses:
Interest
(2,167
)
147,250
189,826
—
334,909
Depreciation and amortization
4,991
30,018
687,066
—
722,075
Property-level operating expenses
—
514
1,109,118
—
1,109,632
Medical office building services costs
—
—
8,315
—
8,315
General, administrative and professional fees
2,695
21,160
91,251
—
115,106
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
884
44
17,804
—
18,732
Total expenses
18,323
200,496
2,112,785
—
2,331,604
Income before income (loss) from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations and noncontrolling interest
438,066
78,715
413,545
(450,478
)
479,848
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
673
(1,181
)
—
(508
)
Income tax benefit
11,828
—
—
—
11,828
Income from continuing operations
449,894
79,388
412,364
(450,478
)
491,168
Discontinued operations
3,615
605
(40,499
)
—
(36,279
)
Net income
453,509
79,993
371,865
(450,478
)
454,889
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,380
—
1,380
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
453,509
$
79,993
$
370,485
$
(450,478
)
$
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.
130
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2012
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
2,538
$
273,524
$
904,669
$
—
$
1,180,731
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,227,124
—
1,227,124
Medical office building and other services revenues
—
—
20,741
—
20,741
Income from loans and investments
2,944
1,871
35,098
—
39,913
Equity earnings in affiliates
322,662
—
997
(323,659
)
—
Interest and other income
476
25
605
—
1,106
Total revenues
328,620
275,420
2,189,234
(323,659
)
2,469,615
Expenses:
Interest
(3,858
)
92,692
199,883
—
288,717
Depreciation and amortization
2,777
35,511
676,679
—
714,967
Property-level operating expenses
—
535
965,887
—
966,422
Medical office building services costs
—
—
9,883
—
9,883
General, administrative and professional fees
3,682
30,317
64,511
—
98,510
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt, net
—
39,737
(2,097
)
—
37,640
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
53,200
—
9,983
—
63,183
Other
79
—
6,861
—
6,940
Total expenses
55,880
198,792
1,931,590
—
2,186,262
Income before income (loss) from unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, and noncontrolling interest
272,740
76,628
257,644
(323,659
)
283,353
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
18,266
(112
)
—
18,154
Income tax benefit
6,282
—
—
—
6,282
Income from continuing operations
279,022
94,894
257,532
(323,659
)
307,789
Discontinued operations
83,778
4,897
(34,689
)
—
53,986
Net income
362,800
99,791
222,843
(323,659
)
361,775
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(1,025
)
—
(1,025
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
362,800
$
99,791
$
223,868
$
(323,659
)
$
362,800
(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 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
$
28,161
$
453,812
$
(480,554
)
$
477,186
Other comprehensive 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 loss
7,001
—
(13,539
)
—
(6,538
)
Comprehensive income
482,768
28,161
440,273
(480,554
)
470,648
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,419
—
1,419
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
482,768
$
28,161
$
438,854
$
(480,554
)
$
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.
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
$
79,993
$
371,865
$
(450,478
)
$
454,889
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
79,993
369,193
(450,478
)
451,194
Comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
1,380
—
1,380
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
452,486
$
79,993
$
367,813
$
(450,478
)
$
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.
132
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2012
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income
$
362,800
$
99,791
$
222,843
$
(323,659
)
$
361,775
Other comprehensive (loss) income:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
2,375
—
2,375
Change in unrealized gain on marketable debt securities
(1,296
)
—
—
—
(1,296
)
Other
—
—
213
—
213
Total other comprehensive (loss) income
(1,296
)
—
2,588
—
1,292
Comprehensive income
361,504
99,791
225,431
(323,659
)
363,067
Comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(1,025
)
—
(1,025
)
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
361,504
$
99,791
$
226,456
$
(323,659
)
$
364,092
(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 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
$
(57,307
)
$
93,013
$
1,219,139
$
—
$
1,254,845
Net cash used in investing activities
(1,358,256
)
(7,725
)
(689,059
)
—
(2,055,040
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under credit facilities
—
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
1,344,782
(904,772
)
(440,010
)
—
—
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
694,481
(256,574
)
(437,907
)
—
—
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
1,424,088
(85,288
)
(580,743
)
—
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.
134
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
$
(1,362
)
$
129,023
$
1,067,094
$
—
$
1,194,755
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
(1,416,336
)
22,835
110,741
—
(1,282,760
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facility
—
(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
2,186,519
(1,890,234
)
(296,285
)
—
—
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
(99,525
)
5,610
93,915
—
—
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
1,429,133
(151,775
)
(1,162,362
)
—
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.
135
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2012
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty (1)
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
$
(761
)
$
193,544
$
800,033
$
—
$
992,816
Net cash used in investing activities
(1,364,125
)
(100
)
(805,464
)
—
(2,169,689
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facilities
—
92,000
(7,062
)
—
84,938
Proceeds from debt
—
2,364,360
346,045
—
2,710,405
Repayment of debt
—
(521,527
)
(671,496
)
—
(1,193,023
)
Net change in intercompany debt
2,151,815
(2,085,801
)
(66,014
)
—
—
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(21,404
)
(2,366
)
—
(23,770
)
Issuance of common stock, net
342,469
—
—
—
342,469
Cash distribution (to) from affiliates
(398,071
)
(21,132
)
419,203
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(728,546
)
—
—
—
(728,546
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(4,446
)
—
—
—
(4,446
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
(4,601
)
—
—
—
(4,601
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
—
—
38
—
38
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
—
—
(5,215
)
—
(5,215
)
Other
20,665
—
—
—
20,665
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
1,379,285
(193,504
)
13,133
—
1,198,914
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
14,399
(60
)
7,702
—
22,041
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
—
60
—
—
60
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
2,335
—
43,472
—
45,807
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
16,734
$
—
$
51,174
$
—
$
67,908
(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)
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
December 31, 2014
(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
2014
Allowance for doubtful accounts
11,017
8,204
—
(4,272
)
(419
)
$
14,530
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
101,436
46,502
—
462
(3,253
)
$
145,147
112,453
54,706
—
(3,810
)
(3,672
)
159,677
2013
Allowance for doubtful accounts
10,960
6,071
—
(6,013
)
(1
)
$
11,017
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
59,731
42,940
—
(1,252
)
17
$
101,436
70,691
49,011
—
(7,265
)
16
112,453
2012
Allowance for doubtful accounts
10,850
8,235
—
(7,739
)
(386
)
$
10,960
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
17,552
43,042
—
(636
)
(227
)
$
59,731
28,402
51,277
—
(8,375
)
(613
)
70,691
137
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
December 31, 2014
(Dollars in Thousands)
For the Years Ended December 31,
2014
2013
2012
(In thousands)
Reconciliation of real estate:
Carrying cost:
Balance at beginning of period
$
20,393,411
$
18,763,903
$
17,029,404
Additions during period:
Acquisitions
1,769,790
1,623,648
1,889,592
Capital expenditures
189,711
183,929
184,675
Dispositions:
Sales and/or transfers to assets held for sale
(293,842
)
(155,184
)
(349,456
)
Foreign currency translation
(87,776
)
(22,885
)
9,688
Balance at end of period
$
21,971,294
$
20,393,411
$
18,763,903
Accumulated depreciation:
Balance at beginning of period
$
2,881,950
$
2,289,783
$
1,729,976
Additions during period:
Depreciation expense
725,485
674,141
620,076
Dispositions:
Sales and/or transfers to assets held for sale
(107,663
)
(78,061
)
(61,583
)
Foreign currency translation
(6,081
)
(3,913
)
1,314
Balance at end of period
$
3,493,691
$
2,881,950
$
2,289,783
138
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
December 31, 2014
(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
2,208
1,977
1989
1989
45 years
The Tunnell Center for Rehabilitation & Heathcare
San Francisco
CA
—
1,902
7,531
—
1,902
7,531
9,433
5,837
3,596
1967
1993
28 years
Lawton Healthcare Center
San Francisco
CA
—
943
514
—
943
514
1,457
496
961
1962
1996
20 years
Village Square Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
San Marcos
CA
—
766
3,507
—
766
3,507
4,273
1,838
2,435
1989
1993
42 years
Valley Gardens Health Care & Rehabilitation Center
Stockton
CA
—
516
3,405
—
516
3,405
3,921
2,059
1,862
1988
1988
29 years
Aurora Care Center
Aurora
CO
—
197
2,328
—
197
2,328
2,525
1,755
770
1962
1995
30 years
Windsor Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Windsor
CT
—
368
2,520
—
368
2,520
2,888
2,138
750
1965
1994
30 years
Lafayette Nursing and Rehab Center
Fayetteville
GA
—
598
6,623
—
598
6,623
7,221
6,410
811
1989
1995
20 years
Canyon West Health and Rehabilitation Center
Caldwell
ID
—
312
2,050
—
312
2,050
2,362
979
1,383
1974
1998
45 years
Mountain Valley Care & Rehabilitation Center
Kellogg
ID
—
68
1,280
—
68
1,280
1,348
1,304
44
1971
1984
25 years
Lewiston Rehabilitation & Care Center
Lewiston
ID
—
133
3,982
—
133
3,982
4,115
3,490
625
1964
1984
29 years
Aspen Park Healthcare
Moscow
ID
—
261
2,571
—
261
2,571
2,832
2,501
331
1955
1990
25 years
Nampa Care Center
Nampa
ID
—
252
2,810
—
252
2,810
3,062
2,700
362
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
3,477
1,757
1985
1995
35 years
Columbus Health and Rehabilitation Center
Columbus
IN
—
345
6,817
—
345
6,817
7,162
6,408
754
1966
1991
25 years
Harrison Health and Rehabilitation Centre
Corydon
IN
—
125
6,068
—
125
6,068
6,193
2,307
3,886
1998
1998
45 years
Valley View Health Care Center
Elkhart
IN
—
87
2,665
—
87
2,665
2,752
2,319
433
1985
1993
25 years
Wildwood Health Care Center
Indianapolis
IN
—
134
4,983
—
134
4,983
5,117
4,306
811
1988
1993
25 years
Windsor Estates Health & Rehab Center
Kokomo
IN
—
256
6,625
—
256
6,625
6,881
4,379
2,502
1962
1995
35 years
Rolling Hills Health Care Center
New Albany
IN
—
81
1,894
—
81
1,894
1,975
1,654
321
1984
1993
25 years
Southwood Health & Rehabilitation Center
Terre Haute
IN
—
90
2,868
—
90
2,868
2,958
2,491
467
1988
1993
25 years
139
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
2,621
625
1968
1990
30 years
Great Barrington Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Great Barrington
MA
—
60
1,142
—
60
1,142
1,202
1,147
55
1967
1969
40 years
Hallmark Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
New Bedford
MA
—
202
2,694
—
202
2,694
2,896
2,535
361
1968
1982
26 years
Eagle Pond Rehabilitation and Living Center
South Dennis
MA
—
296
6,896
—
296
6,896
7,192
3,991
3,201
1985
1987
50 years
Harrington House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Walpole
MA
—
4
4,444
—
4
4,444
4,448
2,384
2,064
1991
1991
45 years
Parkview Acres Care and Rehabilitation Center
Dillon
MT
—
207
2,578
—
207
2,578
2,785
1,984
801
1965
1993
29 years
Park Place Health Care Center
Great Falls
MT
—
600
6,311
—
600
6,311
6,911
4,829
2,082
1963
1993
28 years
Rose Manor Healthcare Center
Durham
NC
—
200
3,527
—
200
3,527
3,727
3,167
560
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
1,530
673
1957
1993
29 years
Greenbriar Terrace Healthcare
Nashua
NH
—
776
6,011
—
776
6,011
6,787
5,587
1,200
1963
1990
25 years
Wasatch Care Center
Ogden
UT
—
373
597
—
373
597
970
603
367
1964
1990
25 years
St. George Care and Rehabilitation Center
St. George
UT
—
419
4,465
—
419
4,465
4,884
3,112
1,772
1976
1993
29 years
Nansemond Pointe Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Suffolk
VA
—
534
6,990
—
534
6,990
7,524
5,143
2,381
1963
1991
32 years
River Pointe Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Virginia Beach
VA
—
770
4,440
—
770
4,440
5,210
4,224
986
1953
1991
25 years
Bay Pointe Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Virginia Beach
VA
—
805
2,886
(380
)
425
2,886
3,311
2,159
1,152
1971
1993
29 years
Birchwood Terrace Healthcare
Burlington
VT
—
15
4,656
—
15
4,656
4,671
4,506
165
1965
1990
27 years
Arden Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Seattle
WA
—
1,111
4,013
—
1,111
4,013
5,124
3,081
2,043
1950
1993
28.5 years
Lakewood Healthcare Center
Tacoma
WA
—
504
3,511
—
504
3,511
4,015
2,268
1,747
1989
1989
45 years
Vancouver Health & Rehabilitation Center
Vancouver
WA
—
449
2,964
—
449
2,964
3,413
2,333
1,080
1970
1993
28 years
Mountain Towers Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Cheyenne
WY
—
342
3,468
—
342
3,468
3,810
2,608
1,202
1964
1992
29 years
South Central Wyoming Healthcare and Rehabilitation
Rawlins
WY
—
151
1,738
—
151
1,738
1,889
1,326
563
1955
1993
29 years
Wind River Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Riverton
WY
—
179
1,559
—
179
1,559
1,738
1,168
570
1967
1992
29 years
TOTAL KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
16,444
162,335
(380
)
16,064
162,335
178,399
125,821
52,578
NON-KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
Whitesburg Gardens Health Care Center
Huntsville
AL
—
534
4,216
328
534
4,544
5,078
4,025
1,053
1968
1991
25 years
Azalea Gardens of Mobile
Mobile
AL
—
5
2,981
319
8
3,297
3,305
2,426
879
1967
1992
29 years
Heartland
Benton
AR
—
650
13,540
18
650
13,558
14,208
1,581
12,627
1992
2011
35 years
Southern Trace
Bryant
AR
—
480
12,455
—
480
12,455
12,935
1,462
11,473
1989
2011
35 years
140
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
Beverly Health Care Golflinks
Hot Springs
AR
—
500
11,311
—
500
11,311
11,811
1,387
10,424
1978
2011
35 years
Lake Village
Lake Village
AR
—
560
8,594
23
560
8,617
9,177
1,071
8,106
1998
2011
35 years
Belle View
Monticello
AR
—
260
9,542
—
260
9,542
9,802
1,121
8,681
1995
2011
35 years
River Chase
Morrilton
AR
—
240
9,476
—
240
9,476
9,716
1,111
8,605
1988
2011
35 years
Brookridge Cove
Morrilton
AR
—
410
11,069
4
410
11,073
11,483
1,323
10,160
1996
2011
35 years
River Ridge
Wynne
AR
—
290
10,763
1
290
10,764
11,054
1,251
9,803
1990
2011
35 years
Kachina Point Health Care and Rehabilitation Center
Sedona
AZ
—
364
4,179
197
364
4,376
4,740
3,214
1,526
1983
1984
45 years
Villa Campana Health Care Center
Tucson
AZ
—
533
2,201
395
533
2,596
3,129
1,584
1,545
1983
1993
35 years
Bay View Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Alameda
CA
—
1,462
5,981
282
1,462
6,263
7,725
4,862
2,863
1967
1993
45 years
Chowchilla Convalescent Center
Chowchilla
CA
—
1,780
5,097
—
1,780
5,097
6,877
634
6,243
1965
2011
35 years
Driftwood Gilroy
Gilroy
CA
—
3,330
13,665
—
3,330
13,665
16,995
1,638
15,357
1968
2011
35 years
Orange Hills Convalescent Hospital
Orange
CA
—
960
20,968
—
960
20,968
21,928
2,369
19,559
1987
2011
35 years
Brighton Care Center
Brighton
CO
—
282
3,377
468
282
3,845
4,127
2,741
1,386
1969
1992
30 years
Cherry Hills Health Care Center
Englewood
CO
—
241
2,180
194
241
2,374
2,615
1,724
891
1960
1995
30 years
Malley Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Northglenn
CO
—
501
8,294
243
501
8,537
9,038
6,182
2,856
1971
1993
29 years
Parkway Pavilion Healthcare
Enfield
CT
—
337
3,607
203
337
3,810
4,147
3,077
1,070
1968
1994
28 years
The Crossings West Campus
New London
CT
—
202
2,363
129
202
2,492
2,694
1,877
817
1969
1994
28 years
The Crossings East Campus
New London
CT
—
401
2,776
263
401
3,039
3,440
2,371
1,069
1968
1992
29 years
Beverly Health - Ft. Pierce
Fort Pierce
FL
—
840
16,318
—
840
16,318
17,158
1,939
15,219
1960
2011
35 years
Willowwood Health & Rehab Center
Flowery Branch
GA
—
1,130
9,219
—
1,130
9,219
10,349
1,100
9,249
1970
2011
35 years
Specialty Care of Marietta
Marietta
GA
—
241
2,782
377
241
3,159
3,400
2,269
1,131
1968
1993
28.5 years
Savannah Rehabilitation & Nursing Center
Savannah
GA
—
213
2,772
345
213
3,117
3,330
2,192
1,138
1968
1993
28.5 years
Savannah Specialty Care Center
Savannah
GA
—
157
2,219
228
157
2,447
2,604
2,023
581
1972
1991
26 years
Boise Health and Rehabilitation Center
Boise
ID
—
256
3,593
281
256
3,874
4,130
1,677
2,453
1977
1998
45 years
Westbury
Lisle
IL
—
730
9,270
—
730
9,270
10,000
2,128
7,872
1990
2009
35 years
Meadowbrooke Rehab Centre & Suites
Anderson
IN
—
1,600
6,710
—
1,600
6,710
8,310
864
7,446
1967
2011
35 years
Chalet Village
Berne
IN
—
590
1,654
—
590
1,654
2,244
320
1,924
1986
2011
35 years
Meadowvale Health and Rehabilitation Center
Bluffton
IN
—
7
787
576
7
1,363
1,370
689
681
1962
1995
22 years
Bremen Health Care Center
Bremen
IN
—
109
3,354
548
109
3,902
4,011
2,256
1,755
1982
1996
45 years
Vermillion Convalescent Center
Clinton
IN
—
700
11,057
—
700
11,057
11,757
1,328
10,429
1971
2011
35 years
Willow Crossing Health & Rehab Center
Columbus
IN
—
880
4,963
—
880
4,963
5,843
672
5,171
1988
2011
35 years
Greenhill Manor
Fowler
IN
—
380
7,659
—
380
7,659
8,039
896
7,143
1973
2011
35 years
141
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
Twin City Healthcare
Gas City
IN
—
350
3,012
—
350
3,012
3,362
433
2,929
1974
2011
35 years
Hanover Nursing Center
Hanover
IN
—
1,070
3,903
—
1,070
3,903
4,973
641
4,332
1975
2011
35 years
Bridgewater Center for Health & Rehab
Hartford City
IN
—
470
1,855
—
470
1,855
2,325
337
1,988
1988
2011
35 years
Oakbrook Village
Huntington
IN
—
600
1,950
—
600
1,950
2,550
303
2,247
1987
2011
35 years
Lakeview Manor
Indianapolis
IN
—
2,780
7,927
—
2,780
7,927
10,707
1,128
9,579
1968
2011
35 years
Wintersong Village
Knox
IN
—
420
2,019
—
420
2,019
2,439
291
2,148
1984
2011
35 years
Woodland Hills Care Center
Lawrenceburg
IN
—
340
3,757
—
340
3,757
4,097
571
3,526
1966
2011
35 years
Parkwood Health Care Center
Lebanon
IN
—
121
4,512
1,291
121
5,803
5,924
4,003
1,921
1977
1993
25 years
Whispering Pines
Monticello
IN
—
460
8,461
—
460
8,461
8,921
1,001
7,920
1988
2011
35 years
Muncie Health & Rehabilitation Center
Muncie
IN
—
108
4,202
1,259
170
5,399
5,569
3,786
1,783
1980
1993
25 years
Willow Bend Living Center
Muncie
IN
—
1,080
4,026
—
1,080
4,026
5,106
524
4,582
1976
2011
35 years
Liberty Village
Muncie
IN
—
1,520
7,542
—
1,520
7,542
9,062
931
8,131
2001
2011
35 years
Petersburg Health Care Center
Petersburg
IN
—
310
8,443
—
310
8,443
8,753
1,025
7,728
1970
2011
35 years
Persimmon Ridge Center
Portland
IN
—
400
9,597
—
400
9,597
9,997
1,163
8,834
1964
2011
35 years
Oakridge Convalescent Center
Richmond
IN
—
640
11,128
—
640
11,128
11,768
1,355
10,413
1975
2011
35 years
Royal Oaks Health Care and Rehabilitation Center
Terre Haute
IN
—
418
5,779
1,209
428
6,978
7,406
2,869
4,537
1995
1995
45 years
Westridge Healthcare Center
Terre Haute
IN
—
690
5,384
—
690
5,384
6,074
675
5,399
1965
2011
35 years
Washington Nursing Center
Washington
IN
—
220
10,054
—
220
10,054
10,274
1,240
9,034
1968
2011
35 years
Pine Knoll Rehabilitation Center
Winchester
IN
—
730
6,039
—
730
6,039
6,769
722
6,047
1986
2011
35 years
Belleville Health Care Center
Belleville
KS
—
590
4,170
—
590
4,170
4,760
558
4,202
1977
2011
35 years
Smokey Hill Rehab Center
Salina
KS
—
360
3,705
—
360
3,705
4,065
575
3,490
1981
2011
35 years
Westwood Manor
Topeka
KS
—
250
3,735
—
250
3,735
3,985
486
3,499
1973
2011
35 years
Infinia at Wichita
Wichita
KS
—
350
13,065
—
350
13,065
13,415
1,476
11,939
1965
2011
35 years
Jackson Manor
Annville
KY
—
131
4,442
—
131
4,442
4,573
1,036
3,537
1989
2006
35 years
Colonial Health & Rehabilitation Center
Bardstown
KY
—
38
2,829
—
38
2,829
2,867
660
2,207
1968
2006
35 years
Rosewood Health Care Center
Bowling Green
KY
—
248
5,371
496
248
5,867
6,115
4,434
1,681
1970
1990
30 years
Riverside Manor Healthcare Center
Calhoun
KY
—
103
2,119
184
103
2,303
2,406
1,772
634
1963
1990
30 years
Oakview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Calvert City
KY
—
124
2,882
1,005
124
3,887
4,011
2,459
1,552
1967
1990
30 years
Green Valley Health & Rehabilitation Center
Carrollton
KY
—
29
2,325
—
29
2,325
2,354
542
1,812
1978
2006
35 years
Summit Manor Health & Rehabilitation Center
Columbia
KY
—
38
12,510
—
38
12,510
12,548
2,919
9,629
1965
2006
35 years
Danville Centre for Health and Rehabilitation
Danville
KY
—
322
3,538
536
322
4,074
4,396
2,574
1,822
1962
1995
30 years
Woodland Terrace Health Care Facility
Elizabethtown
KY
—
216
1,795
315
216
2,110
2,326
1,938
388
1969
1982
26 years
142
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
Glasgow Health & Rehabilitation Center
Glasgow
KY
—
21
2,997
—
21
2,997
3,018
699
2,319
1968
2006
35 years
Harrodsburg Health Care Center
Harrodsburg
KY
—
137
1,830
642
137
2,472
2,609
1,694
915
1974
1985
35 years
Professional Care Health & Rehabilitation Center
Hartford
KY
—
22
7,905
—
22
7,905
7,927
1,844
6,083
1967
2006
35 years
Hart County Health Center
Horse Cave
KY
—
68
6,059
—
68
6,059
6,127
1,414
4,713
1993
2006
35 years
Heritage Hall Health & Rehabilitation Center
Lawrenceburg
KY
—
38
3,920
—
38
3,920
3,958
915
3,043
1973
2006
35 years
Tanbark Health & Rehabilitation Center
Lexington
KY
—
868
6,061
—
868
6,061
6,929
1,414
5,515
1989
2006
35 years
Northfield Centre for Health and Rehabilitation
Louisville
KY
—
285
1,555
692
285
2,247
2,532
1,491
1,041
1969
1985
30 years
Jefferson Manor
Louisville
KY
—
2,169
4,075
—
2,169
4,075
6,244
951
5,293
1982
2006
35 years
Jefferson Place
Louisville
KY
—
1,307
9,175
—
1,307
9,175
10,482
2,141
8,341
1991
2006
35 years
Meadowview Health & Rehabilitation Center
Louisville
KY
—
317
4,666
—
317
4,666
4,983
1,089
3,894
1973
2006
35 years
Rockford Health & Rehabilitation Center
Louisville
KY
—
364
9,568
—
364
9,568
9,932
2,233
7,699
1975
2006
35 years
Summerfield Health & Rehabilitation Center
Louisville
KY
—
1,089
10,756
—
1,089
10,756
11,845
2,510
9,335
1979
2006
35 years
Hillcrest Health Care Center
Owensboro
KY
—
544
2,619
993
544
3,612
4,156
2,782
1,374
1963
1982
22 years
McCreary Health & Rehabilitation Center
Pine Knot
KY
—
73
2,443
—
73
2,443
2,516
570
1,946
1990
2006
35 years
North Hardin Health & Rehabilitation Center
Radcliff
KY
—
218
11,944
—
218
11,944
12,162
2,787
9,375
1986
2006
35 years
Monroe Health & Rehabilitation Center
Tompkinsville
KY
—
32
8,756
—
32
8,756
8,788
2,043
6,745
1969
2006
35 years
Fountain Circle Health and Rehabilitation
Winchester
KY
—
137
6,120
1,055
137
7,175
7,312
5,123
2,189
1967
1990
30 years
Colony House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Abington
MA
—
132
999
194
132
1,193
1,325
1,153
172
1965
1969
40 years
Wingate at Andover
Andover
MA
—
1,450
14,798
—
1,450
14,798
16,248
1,803
14,445
1992
2011
35 years
Blueberry Hill Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
Beverly
MA
—
129
4,290
571
129
4,861
4,990
3,462
1,528
1965
1968
40 years
Wingate at Brighton
Brighton
MA
—
1,070
7,383
—
1,070
7,383
8,453
1,026
7,427
1995
2011
35 years
Walden Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Concord
MA
—
181
1,347
178
181
1,525
1,706
1,403
303
1969
1968
40 years
Sachem Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
East Bridgewater
MA
—
529
1,238
232
529
1,470
1,999
1,655
344
1968
1982
27 years
Chestnut Hill Rehab & Nursing
East Longmeadow
MA
—
3,050
5,392
—
3,050
5,392
8,442
806
7,636
1985
2011
35 years
Crawford Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Fall River
MA
—
127
1,109
312
127
1,421
1,548
1,144
404
1968
1982
29 years
Franklin Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Franklin
MA
—
156
757
158
156
915
1,071
815
256
1967
1969
40 years
Wingate at Haverhill
Haverhill
MA
—
810
9,288
—
810
9,288
10,098
1,238
8,860
1973
2011
35 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
Skilled Care Center at Silver Lake
Kingston
MA
—
3,230
19,870
—
3,230
19,870
23,100
2,610
20,490
1992
2011
35 years
River Terrace Healthcare
Lancaster
MA
—
268
957
147
268
1,104
1,372
1,144
228
1969
1969
40 years
Wentworth Skilled Care Center
Lowell
MA
—
820
11,220
—
820
11,220
12,040
1,352
10,688
1966
2011
35 years
Bolton Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Marlborough
MA
—
222
2,431
228
222
2,659
2,881
2,247
634
1973
1984
34.5 years
The Eliot Healthcare Center
Natick
MA
—
249
1,328
230
249
1,558
1,807
1,452
355
1996
1982
31 years
Wingate at Needham
Needham Heights
MA
—
920
9,236
—
920
9,236
10,156
1,234
8,922
1996
2011
35 years
Brigham Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Newburyport
MA
—
126
1,708
134
126
1,842
1,968
1,665
303
1806
1982
27 years
Country Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Newburyport
MA
—
199
3,004
378
199
3,382
3,581
2,965
616
1968
1982
27 years
Quincy Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Quincy
MA
—
216
2,911
204
216
3,115
3,331
2,854
477
1965
1984
24 years
Wingate at Reading
Reading
MA
—
920
7,499
—
920
7,499
8,419
1,016
7,403
1988
2011
35 years
Den-Mar Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Rockport
MA
—
23
1,560
187
23
1,747
1,770
1,547
223
1963
1985
30 years
Wingate at South Hadley
South Hadley
MA
—
1,870
15,572
—
1,870
15,572
17,442
1,864
15,578
1988
2011
35 years
Ring East
Springfield
MA
—
1,250
13,561
—
1,250
13,561
14,811
1,697
13,114
1987
2011
35 years
Blue Hills Alzheimer's Care Center
Stoughton
MA
—
511
1,026
175
511
1,201
1,712
1,425
287
1965
1982
28 years
Wingate at Sudbury
Sudbury
MA
—
1,540
8,100
—
1,540
8,100
9,640
1,158
8,482
1997
2011
35 years
Country Gardens Skilled Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
Swansea
MA
—
415
2,675
180
415
2,855
3,270
2,590
680
1969
1984
27 years
Brookside Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Webster
MA
—
102
1,154
173
102
1,327
1,429
1,193
236
1967
1982
31 years
Newton and Wellesley Alzheimer Center
Wellesley
MA
—
297
3,250
172
297
3,422
3,719
2,970
749
1971
1984
30 years
Riverdale Gardens Rehab & Nursing
West Springfield
MA
—
2,140
6,997
107
2,140
7,104
9,244
1,178
8,066
1960
2011
35 years
Wingate at Wilbraham
Wilbraham
MA
—
4,070
10,777
—
4,070
10,777
14,847
1,411
13,436
1988
2011
35 years
Worcester Skilled Care Center
Worcester
MA
—
620
10,958
—
620
10,958
11,578
1,459
10,119
1970
2011
35 years
Cumberland Villa Nursing Center
Cumberland
MD
—
660
23,970
—
660
23,970
24,630
2,667
21,963
1968
2011
35 years
Colton Villa
Hagerstown
MD
—
1,550
16,973
—
1,550
16,973
18,523
2,011
16,512
1971
2011
35 years
Westminster Nursing & Convalescent Center
Westminster
MD
—
2,160
15,931
—
2,160
15,931
18,091
1,886
16,205
1973
2011
35 years
Augusta Rehabilitation Center
Augusta
ME
—
152
1,074
146
152
1,220
1,372
1,120
252
1968
1985
30 years
Eastside Rehabilitation and Living Center
Bangor
ME
—
316
1,349
134
316
1,483
1,799
1,354
445
1967
1985
30 years
Westgate Manor
Bangor
ME
—
287
2,718
151
287
2,869
3,156
2,607
549
1969
1985
31 years
Winship Green Nursing Center
Bath
ME
—
110
1,455
128
110
1,583
1,693
1,320
373
1974
1985
35 years
Brewer Rehabilitation and Living Center
Brewer
ME
—
228
2,737
304
228
3,041
3,269
2,407
862
1974
1985
33 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
Kennebunk Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Kennebunk
ME
—
99
1,898
161
99
2,059
2,158
1,601
557
1977
1985
35 years
Norway Rehabilitation & Living Center
Norway
ME
—
133
1,658
118
133
1,776
1,909
1,376
533
1972
1985
39 years
Brentwood Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Yarmouth
ME
—
181
2,789
146
181
2,935
3,116
2,347
769
1945
1985
45 years
Autumn Woods Residential Health Care Facility
Warren
MI
—
1,495
26,015
—
1,495
26,015
27,510
2,292
25,218
2012
2012
35 years
Hopkins Healthcare
Hopkins
MN
—
4,470
21,409
—
4,470
21,409
25,879
2,442
23,437
1961
2011
35 years
Andrew Care Home
Minneapolis
MN
—
3,280
5,083
243
3,280
5,326
8,606
1,043
7,563
1941
2011
35 years
Golden Living Center - Rochester East
Rochester
MN
—
639
3,497
—
639
3,497
4,136
3,561
575
1967
1982
28 years
Ashland Healthcare
Ashland
MO
—
770
4,400
—
770
4,400
5,170
555
4,615
1993
2011
35 years
South Hampton Place
Columbia
MO
—
710
11,279
—
710
11,279
11,989
1,320
10,669
1994
2011
35 years
Dixon Nursing & Rehab
Dixon
MO
—
570
3,342
—
570
3,342
3,912
449
3,463
1989
2011
35 years
Current River Nursing
Doniphan
MO
—
450
7,703
—
450
7,703
8,153
992
7,161
1991
2011
35 years
Forsyth Care Center
Forsyth
MO
—
710
6,731
—
710
6,731
7,441
902
6,539
1993
2011
35 years
Maryville Health Care Center
Maryville
MO
—
630
5,825
—
630
5,825
6,455
790
5,665
1972
2011
35 years
Glenwood Healthcare
Seymour
MO
—
670
3,737
—
670
3,737
4,407
488
3,919
1990
2011
35 years
Silex Community Care
Silex
MO
—
730
2,689
—
730
2,689
3,419
387
3,032
1991
2011
35 years
Gravios Nursing Center
St. Louis
MO
—
1,560
10,582
301
1,560
10,883
12,443
1,394
11,049
1954
2011
35 years
Bellefontaine Gardens
St. Louis
MO
—
1,610
4,314
—
1,610
4,314
5,924
631
5,293
1988
2011
35 years
Strafford Care Center
Strafford
MO
—
1,670
8,251
—
1,670
8,251
9,921
980
8,941
1995
2011
35 years
Windsor Healthcare
Windsor
MO
—
510
3,345
—
510
3,345
3,855
449
3,406
1996
2011
35 years
Chapel Hill Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Chapel Hill
NC
—
347
3,029
450
347
3,479
3,826
2,478
1,348
1984
1993
28 years
Pettigrew Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Durham
NC
—
101
2,889
223
101
3,112
3,213
2,345
868
1969
1993
28 years
Rehabilitation and Health Center of Gastonia
Gastonia
NC
—
158
2,359
450
158
2,809
2,967
1,969
998
1968
1992
29 years
Lakewood Manor
Hendersonville
NC
—
1,610
7,759
—
1,610
7,759
9,369
1,039
8,330
1979
2011
35 years
Kinston Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Kinston
NC
—
186
3,038
502
186
3,540
3,726
2,342
1,384
1961
1993
29 years
Lincoln Nursing Center
Lincolnton
NC
—
39
3,309
197
39
3,506
3,545
2,746
799
1976
1986
35 years
Rehabilitation and Nursing Center of Monroe
Monroe
NC
—
185
2,654
368
185
3,022
3,207
2,187
1,020
1963
1993
28 years
Sunnybrook Healthcare and Rehabilitation Specialists
Raleigh
NC
—
187
3,409
360
187
3,769
3,956
3,244
712
1971
1991
25 years
Raleigh Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center
Raleigh
NC
—
316
5,470
581
316
6,051
6,367
5,182
1,185
1969
1991
25 years
Guardian Care of Roanoke Rapids
Roanoke Rapids
NC
—
339
4,132
550
339
4,682
5,021
3,898
1,123
1967
1991
25 years
Guardian Care of Rocky Mount
Rocky Mount
NC
—
240
1,732
302
240
2,034
2,274
1,573
701
1975
1997
25 years
Cypress Pointe Rehabilitation and Health Care Centre
Wilmington
NC
—
233
3,710
258
233
3,968
4,201
3,013
1,188
1966
1993
28.5 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
Silas Creek Manor
Winston-Salem
NC
—
211
1,893
408
211
2,301
2,512
1,520
992
1966
1993
28.5 years
Guardian Care of Zebulon
Zebulon
NC
—
179
1,933
150
179
2,083
2,262
1,507
755
1973
1993
29 years
Dover Rehabilitation and Living Center
Dover
NH
—
355
3,797
217
355
4,014
4,369
3,840
529
1969
1990
25 years
Hanover Terrace Healthcare
Hanover
NH
—
326
1,825
252
326
2,077
2,403
1,415
988
1969
1993
29 years
Lopatcong Center
Phillipsburg
NJ
—
1,490
12,336
—
1,490
12,336
13,826
4,855
8,971
1982
2004
30 years
Las Vegas Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Las Vegas
NV
—
454
1,018
187
454
1,205
1,659
746
913
1940
1992
30 years
Torrey Pines Care Center
Las Vegas
NV
—
256
1,324
270
256
1,594
1,850
1,203
647
1971
1992
29 years
Hearthstone of Northern Nevada
Sparks
NV
—
1,400
9,365
—
1,400
9,365
10,765
1,210
9,555
1988
2011
35 years
Wingate at St. Francis
Beacon
NY
—
1,900
18,115
—
1,900
18,115
20,015
2,174
17,841
2002
2011
35 years
Garden Gate
Cheektowaga
NY
—
760
15,643
30
760
15,673
16,433
1,931
14,502
1979
2011
35 years
Brookhaven
East Patchogue
NY
—
1,100
25,840
30
1,100
25,870
26,970
2,897
24,073
1988
2011
35 years
Wingate at Dutchess
Fishkill
NY
—
1,300
19,685
—
1,300
19,685
20,985
2,338
18,647
1996
2011
35 years
Autumn View
Hamburg
NY
—
1,190
24,687
34
1,190
24,721
25,911
2,902
23,009
1983
2011
35 years
Wingate at Ulster
Highland
NY
—
1,500
18,223
—
1,500
18,223
19,723
2,083
17,640
1998
2011
35 years
North Gate
North Tonawanda
NY
—
1,010
14,801
40
1,010
14,841
15,851
1,870
13,981
1982
2011
35 years
Seneca
West Seneca
NY
—
1,400
13,491
5
1,400
13,496
14,896
1,654
13,242
1974
2011
35 years
Harris Hill
Williamsville
NY
—
1,240
33,574
33
1,240
33,607
34,847
3,744
31,103
1992
2011
35 years
Cambridge Health & Rehabilitation Center
Cambridge
OH
—
108
2,642
199
108
2,841
2,949
2,336
613
1975
1993
25 years
Winchester Place Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Canal Winchester
OH
—
454
7,149
283
454
7,432
7,886
6,015
1,871
1974
1993
28 years
Chillicothe Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
Chillicothe
OH
—
128
3,481
313
128
3,794
3,922
3,114
808
1976
1985
34 years
Burlington House
Cincinnati
OH
—
918
5,087
3,010
918
8,097
9,015
1,752
7,263
1989
2004
35 years
Franklin Woods Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Columbus
OH
—
190
4,712
202
190
4,914
5,104
2,890
2,214
1986
1992
38 years
Minerva Park Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Columbus
OH
—
210
3,684
354
210
4,038
4,248
1,744
2,504
1973
1997
45 years
Regency Manor
Columbus
OH
—
606
16,424
401
606
16,825
17,431
11,275
6,156
1883
2004
35 years
Coshocton Health & Rehabilitation Center
Coshocton
OH
—
203
1,979
326
203
2,305
2,508
1,778
730
1974
1993
25 years
Olentangy Woods
Galion
OH
—
540
6,324
(1,463
)
540
4,861
5,401
611
4,790
1967
2011
35 years
Lebanon Country Manor
Lebanon
OH
—
105
3,617
140
105
3,757
3,862
2,565
1,297
1984
1986
43 years
Logan Health Care Center
Logan
OH
—
169
3,750
271
169
4,021
4,190
2,996
1,194
1979
1991
30 years
Marietta Convalescent Center
Marietta
OH
—
158
3,266
75
158
3,341
3,499
2,922
577
1972
1993
25 years
Pickerington Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
Pickerington
OH
—
312
4,382
349
312
4,731
5,043
2,754
2,289
1984
1992
37 years
Renaissance North
Warren
OH
—
1,100
8,196
(3,182
)
1,059
5,055
6,114
4,566
1,548
1967
2011
35 years
Country Glenn
Washington Court House
OH
—
490
13,460
(1,120
)
490
12,340
12,830
1,361
11,469
1984
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
Avamere Rehab of Coos Bay
Coos Bay
OR
—
1,920
3,394
—
1,920
3,394
5,314
464
4,850
1968
2011
35 years
Avamere Riverpark of Eugene
Eugene
OR
—
1,960
17,622
—
1,960
17,622
19,582
2,012
17,570
1988
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of Eugene
Eugene
OR
—
1,080
7,257
—
1,080
7,257
8,337
904
7,433
1966
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of Clackamas
Gladstone
OR
—
820
3,844
—
820
3,844
4,664
507
4,157
1961
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of Hillsboro
Hillsboro
OR
—
1,390
8,628
—
1,390
8,628
10,018
1,056
8,962
1973
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of Junction City
Junction City
OR
—
590
5,583
—
590
5,583
6,173
671
5,502
1966
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of King City
King City
OR
—
1,290
10,646
—
1,290
10,646
11,936
1,249
10,687
1975
2011
35 years
Avamere Rehab of Lebanon
Lebanon
OR
—
980
12,954
—
980
12,954
13,934
1,470
12,464
1974
2011
35 years
Medford Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center
Medford
OR
—
362
4,610
222
362
4,832
5,194
3,687
1,507
1961
1991
34 years
Newport Rehabilitation & Specialty Care Center
Newport
OR
—
380
3,420
813
380
4,233
4,613
488
4,125
1997
2011
35 years
Mountain View
Oregon City
OR
—
1,056
6,831
—
1,056
6,831
7,887
560
7,327
1977
2012
35 years
Avamere Crestview of Portland
Portland
OR
—
1,610
13,942
—
1,610
13,942
15,552
1,613
13,939
1964
2011
35 years
Sunnyside Care Center
Salem
OR
—
1,512
2,249
217
1,512
2,466
3,978
1,597
2,381
1981
1991
30 years
Avamere Twin Oaks of Sweet Home
Sweet Home
OR
—
290
4,536
—
290
4,536
4,826
541
4,285
1972
2011
35 years
Balanced Care at Bloomsburg
Bloomsburg
PA
—
621
1,371
—
621
1,371
1,992
320
1,672
1997
2006
35 years
The Belvedere
Chester
PA
—
822
7,203
—
822
7,203
8,025
2,823
5,202
1899
2004
30 years
Mountain View Nursing Home
Greensburg
PA
—
580
12,817
223
580
13,040
13,620
1,563
12,057
1971
2011
35 years
Pennsburg Manor
Pennsburg
PA
—
1,091
7,871
—
1,091
7,871
8,962
3,146
5,816
1982
2004
30 years
Chapel Manor
Philadelphia
PA
—
1,595
13,982
1,358
1,595
15,340
16,935
5,960
10,975
1948
2004
30 years
Wyomissing Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Reading
PA
—
61
5,095
272
61
5,367
5,428
2,439
2,989
1966
1993
45 years
Wayne Center
Strafford
PA
—
662
6,872
850
662
7,722
8,384
3,168
5,216
1875
2004
30 years
Oak Hill Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
Pawtucket
RI
—
91
6,724
335
91
7,059
7,150
3,248
3,902
1966
1990
45 years
Epic- Bayview
Beaufort
SC
—
890
14,311
—
890
14,311
15,201
1,773
13,428
1970
2011
35 years
Dundee Nursing Home
Bennettsville
SC
—
320
8,693
—
320
8,693
9,013
1,076
7,937
1958
2011
35 years
Epic-Conway
Conway
SC
—
1,090
16,880
—
1,090
16,880
17,970
2,042
15,928
1975
2011
35 years
Mt. Pleasant Nursing Center
Mount Pleasant
SC
—
1,810
9,079
—
1,810
9,079
10,889
1,158
9,731
1977
2011
35 years
Firesteel
Mitchell
SD
—
690
15,360
—
690
15,360
16,050
1,824
14,226
1966
2011
35 years
Fountain Springs Healthcare Center
Rapid City
SD
—
940
28,647
—
940
28,647
29,587
3,078
26,509
1989
2011
35 years
Masters Health Care Center
Algood
TN
—
524
4,370
390
524
4,760
5,284
3,410
1,874
1981
1987
38 years
Brookewood Health Care Center
Decatur
TN
—
470
4,617
—
470
4,617
5,087
625
4,462
1981
2011
35 years
Tri-State Comp Care Center
Harrogate
TN
—
1,520
11,515
—
1,520
11,515
13,035
1,364
11,671
1990
2011
35 years
Madison Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Madison
TN
—
168
1,445
269
168
1,714
1,882
1,219
663
1968
1992
29 years
Primacy Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center
Memphis
TN
—
1,222
8,344
294
1,222
8,638
9,860
5,852
4,008
1980
1990
37 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
Green Acres - Baytown
Baytown
TX
—
490
9,104
—
490
9,104
9,594
1,070
8,524
1970
2011
35 years
Allenbrook Healthcare
Baytown
TX
—
470
11,304
—
470
11,304
11,774
1,345
10,429
1975
2011
35 years
Summer Place Nursing and Rehab
Beaumont
TX
—
1,160
15,934
—
1,160
15,934
17,094
1,872
15,222
2009
2011
35 years
Green Acres - Center
Center
TX
—
200
5,446
—
200
5,446
5,646
714
4,932
1972
2011
35 years
Regency Nursing Home
Clarksville
TX
—
380
8,711
—
380
8,711
9,091
1,093
7,998
1989
2011
35 years
Park Manor - Conroe
Conroe
TX
—
1,310
22,318
—
1,310
22,318
23,628
2,463
21,165
2001
2011
35 years
Trisun Care Center Westwood
Corpus Christi
TX
—
440
8,624
—
440
8,624
9,064
1,038
8,026
1973
2011
35 years
Trisun Care Center River Ridge
Corpus Christi
TX
—
890
7,695
—
890
7,695
8,585
988
7,597
1994
2011
35 years
Heritage Oaks West
Corsicana
TX
—
510
15,806
—
510
15,806
16,316
1,848
14,468
1995
2011
35 years
Park Manor
DeSoto
TX
—
1,080
14,484
—
1,080
14,484
15,564
1,736
13,828
1987
2011
35 years
Hill Country Care
Dripping Springs
TX
—
740
3,973
16
756
3,973
4,729
521
4,208
1986
2011
35 years
Sandstone Ranch
El Paso
TX
—
1,580
8,396
—
1,580
8,396
9,976
1,492
8,484
2010
2011
35 years
Pecan Tree Rehab & Healthcare
Gainesville
TX
—
430
11,499
—
430
11,499
11,929
1,378
10,551
1990
2011
35 years
Pleasant Valley Health & Rehab
Garland
TX
—
1,040
9,383
—
1,040
9,383
10,423
1,198
9,225
2008
2011
35 years
Upshur Manor
Gilmer
TX
—
770
8,126
—
770
8,126
8,896
1,019
7,877
1990
2011
35 years
Beechnut Manor
Houston
TX
—
1,080
12,030
—
1,080
12,030
13,110
1,474
11,636
1982
2011
35 years
Park Manor - Cypress Station
Houston
TX
—
1,450
19,542
—
1,450
19,542
20,992
2,196
18,796
2003
2011
35 years
Park Manor of Westchase
Houston
TX
—
2,760
16,715
—
2,760
16,715
19,475
1,917
17,558
2005
2011
35 years
Park Manor - Cyfair
Houston
TX
—
1,720
14,717
—
1,720
14,717
16,437
1,697
14,740
1999
2011
35 years
Green Acres - Humble
Humble
TX
—
2,060
6,738
—
2,060
6,738
8,798
900
7,898
1972
2011
35 years
Park Manor - Humble
Humble
TX
—
1,650
17,257
—
1,650
17,257
18,907
1,968
16,939
2003
2011
35 years
Green Acres - Huntsville
Huntsville
TX
—
290
2,568
—
290
2,568
2,858
414
2,444
1968
2011
35 years
Legend Oaks Healthcare
Jacksonville
TX
—
760
9,639
—
760
9,639
10,399
1,184
9,215
2006
2011
35 years
Avalon Kirbyville
Kirbyville
TX
—
260
7,713
—
260
7,713
7,973
980
6,993
1987
2011
35 years
Millbrook Healthcare
Lancaster
TX
—
750
7,480
—
750
7,480
8,230
1,011
7,219
2008
2011
35 years
Nexion Health at Linden
Linden
TX
—
680
3,495
—
680
3,495
4,175
562
3,613
1968
2011
35 years
SWLTC Marshall Conroe
Marshall
TX
—
810
10,093
—
810
10,093
10,903
1,272
9,631
2008
2011
35 years
McKinney Healthcare & Rehab
McKinney
TX
—
1,450
10,345
—
1,450
10,345
11,795
1,297
10,498
2006
2011
35 years
Park Manor of McKinney
McKinney
TX
—
1,540
11,049
(2,345
)
1,540
8,704
10,244
1,116
9,128
1993
2011
35 years
Midland Nursing Center
Midland
TX
—
530
13,311
—
530
13,311
13,841
1,538
12,303
2008
2011
35 years
Park Manor of Quail Valley
Missouri City
TX
—
1,920
16,841
—
1,920
16,841
18,761
1,926
16,835
2005
2011
35 years
Nexion Health at Mt. Pleasant
Mount Pleasant
TX
—
520
5,050
—
520
5,050
5,570
735
4,835
1970
2011
35 years
The Meadows Nursing and Rehab
Orange
TX
—
380
10,777
—
380
10,777
11,157
1,321
9,836
2006
2011
35 years
Cypress Glen Nursing and Rehab
Port Arthur
TX
—
1,340
14,142
—
1,340
14,142
15,482
1,749
13,733
2000
2011
35 years
Cypress Glen East
Port Arthur
TX
—
490
10,663
—
490
10,663
11,153
1,293
9,860
1986
2011
35 years
Trisun Care Center Coastal Palms
Portland
TX
—
390
8,548
—
390
8,548
8,938
1,037
7,901
1998
2011
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
Legend Oaks Healthcare San Angelo
San Angelo
TX
—
870
12,282
—
870
12,282
13,152
1,467
11,685
2006
2011
35 years
Parklane West
San Antonio
TX
—
770
10,242
—
770
10,242
11,012
1,283
9,729
1988
2011
35 years
San Pedro Manor
San Antonio
TX
—
740
11,498
(2,768
)
740
8,730
9,470
1,132
8,338
1986
2011
35 years
Nexion Health at Sherman
Sherman
TX
—
250
6,636
—
250
6,636
6,886
875
6,011
1971
2011
35 years
Avalon Trinity
Trinity
TX
—
330
9,413
—
330
9,413
9,743
1,156
8,587
1985
2011
35 years
Renfro Nursing Home
Waxahachie
TX
—
510
7,602
—
510
7,602
8,112
1,033
7,079
1976
2011
35 years
Avalon Wharton
Wharton
TX
—
270
5,107
—
270
5,107
5,377
729
4,648
1988
2011
35 years
Federal Heights Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
Salt Lake City
UT
—
201
2,322
247
201
2,569
2,770
1,939
831
1962
1992
29 years
Infinia at Granite Hills
Salt Lake City
UT
—
740
1,247
700
756
1,931
2,687
404
2,283
1972
2011
35 years
Crosslands Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center
Sandy
UT
—
334
4,300
275
334
4,575
4,909
2,666
2,243
1987
1992
40 years
Sleepy Hollow Manor
Annandale
VA
—
7,210
13,562
—
7,210
13,562
20,772
1,801
18,971
1963
2011
35 years
The Cedars Nursing Home
Charlottesville
VA
—
2,810
10,763
—
2,810
10,763
13,573
1,362
12,211
1964
2011
35 years
Emporia Manor
Emporia
VA
—
620
7,492
15
635
7,492
8,127
980
7,147
1971
2011
35 years
Harbour Pointe Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Norfolk
VA
—
427
4,441
1,033
427
5,474
5,901
3,698
2,203
1969
1993
28 years
Walnut Hill Convalescent Center
Petersburg
VA
—
930
11,597
—
930
11,597
12,527
1,378
11,149
1972
2011
35 years
Battlefield Park Convalescent Center
Petersburg
VA
—
1,010
12,489
—
1,010
12,489
13,499
1,467
12,032
1976
2011
35 years
Bellingham Health Care and Rehabilitation Services
Bellingham
WA
—
441
3,824
153
441
3,977
4,418
3,023
1,395
1972
1993
28.5 years
St. Francis of Bellingham
Bellingham
WA
—
1,740
23,581
—
1,740
23,581
25,321
2,598
22,723
1984
2011
35 years
Evergreen North Cascades
Bellingham
WA
—
1,220
7,554
—
1,220
7,554
8,774
1,029
7,745
1999
2011
35 years
Everett Rehabilitation & Care
Everett
WA
—
2,750
27,337
—
2,750
27,337
30,087
2,978
27,109
1995
2011
35 years
Northwest Continuum Care Center
Longview
WA
—
145
2,563
171
145
2,734
2,879
2,031
848
1955
1992
29 years
SunRise Care & Rehab Moses Lake
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
17,439
—
660
17,439
18,099
1,964
16,135
1972
2011
35 years
SunRise Care & Rehab Lake Ridge
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
8,866
—
660
8,866
9,526
1,046
8,480
1988
2011
35 years
Rainier Vista Care Center
Puyallup
WA
—
520
4,780
305
520
5,085
5,605
2,819
2,786
1986
1991
40 years
Queen Anne Healthcare
Seattle
WA
—
570
2,750
228
570
2,978
3,548
2,267
1,281
1970
1993
29 years
Richmond Beach Rehab
Seattle
WA
—
2,930
16,199
231
2,930
16,430
19,360
1,921
17,439
1993
2011
35 years
Avamere Olympic Rehab of Sequim
Sequim
WA
—
590
16,896
—
590
16,896
17,486
1,935
15,551
1974
2011
35 years
Shelton Nursing Home
Shelton
WA
—
510
8,570
—
510
8,570
9,080
1,013
8,067
1998
2011
35 years
Avamere Heritage Rehab of Tacoma
Tacoma
WA
—
1,760
4,616
—
1,760
4,616
6,376
635
5,741
1968
2011
35 years
Avamere Skilled Nursing Tacoma
Tacoma
WA
—
1,320
1,544
2,050
1,320
3,594
4,914
370
4,544
1972
2011
35 years
Cascade Park Care Center
Vancouver
WA
—
1,860
14,854
—
1,860
14,854
16,714
1,670
15,044
1991
2011
35 years
Eastview Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Antigo
WI
—
200
4,047
236
200
4,283
4,483
3,727
756
1962
1991
28 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
Colony Oaks Care Center
Appleton
WI
—
353
3,571
280
353
3,851
4,204
2,994
1,210
1967
1993
29 years
Mount Carmel Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Burlington
WI
—
274
7,205
299
274
7,504
7,778
5,122
2,656
1971
1991
30 years
Chilton Health and Rehab
Chilton
WI
—
440
6,114
—
440
6,114
6,554
2,932
3,622
1963
2011
35 years
Florence Villa
Florence
WI
—
340
5,631
—
340
5,631
5,971
719
5,252
1970
2011
35 years
San Luis Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Green Bay
WI
—
259
5,299
224
259
5,523
5,782
4,582
1,200
1968
1996
25 years
Western Village
Green Bay
WI
—
1,310
4,882
—
1,310
4,882
6,192
716
5,476
1965
2011
35 years
Sheridan Medical Complex
Kenosha
WI
—
282
4,910
134
282
5,044
5,326
4,542
784
1964
1991
25 years
Woodstock Health and Rehabilitation Center
Kenosha
WI
—
562
7,424
331
562
7,755
8,317
7,096
1,221
1970
1991
25 years
North Ridge Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Manitowoc
WI
—
206
3,785
147
206
3,932
4,138
3,066
1,072
1964
1992
29 years
Vallhaven Care Center
Neenah
WI
—
337
5,125
368
337
5,493
5,830
4,201
1,629
1966
1993
28 years
Kennedy Park Medical & Rehabilitation Center
Schofield
WI
—
301
3,596
399
301
3,995
4,296
3,748
548
1966
1982
29 years
Greendale Health & Rehab
Sheboygan
WI
—
880
1,941
—
880
1,941
2,821
325
2,496
1967
2011
35 years
South Shore Manor
St. Francis
WI
—
630
2,300
—
630
2,300
2,930
309
2,621
1960
2011
35 years
Waukesha Springs (Westmoreland)
Waukesha
WI
—
1,380
16,205
—
1,380
16,205
17,585
2,072
15,513
1973
2011
35 years
Colonial Manor Medical and Rehabilitation Center
Wausau
WI
—
169
3,370
183
169
3,553
3,722
2,419
1,303
1964
1995
30 years
Wisconsin Dells Health & Rehab
Wisconsin Dells
WI
—
730
18,994
—
730
18,994
19,724
2,086
17,638
1972
2011
35 years
Logan Center
Logan
WV
—
300
12,959
—
300
12,959
13,259
1,426
11,833
1987
2011
35 years
Ravenswood Healthcare Center
Ravenswood
WV
—
320
12,710
—
320
12,710
13,030
1,402
11,628
1987
2011
35 years
Valley Center
South Charleston
WV
—
750
24,115
—
750
24,115
24,865
2,690
22,175
1987
2011
35 years
White Sulphur
White Sulphur Springs
WV
—
250
13,055
—
250
13,055
13,305
1,450
11,855
1987
2011
35 years
Sage View Care Center
Rock Springs
WY
—
287
2,392
158
287
2,550
2,837
1,903
934
1964
1993
30 years
TOTAL NON-KINDRED SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
236,050
2,398,083
35,259
236,131
2,433,261
2,669,392
575,467
2,093,925
TOTAL FOR SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
252,494
2,560,418
34,879
252,195
2,595,596
2,847,791
701,288
2,146,503
KINDRED HOSPITALS
Kindred Hospital - Arizona - Phoenix
Phoenix
AZ
—
226
3,359
—
226
3,359
3,585
2,604
981
1980
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Tucson
Tucson
AZ
—
130
3,091
—
130
3,091
3,221
2,827
394
1969
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - Brea
Brea
CA
—
3,144
2,611
—
3,144
2,611
5,755
1,258
4,497
1990
1995
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Ontario
Ontario
CA
—
523
2,988
—
523
2,988
3,511
2,759
752
1950
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Diego
San Diego
CA
—
670
11,764
—
670
11,764
12,434
10,940
1,494
1965
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Francisco Bay Area
San Leandro
CA
—
2,735
5,870
—
2,735
5,870
8,605
6,059
2,546
1962
1993
25 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
Kindred Hospital - Westminster
Westminster
CA
—
727
7,384
—
727
7,384
8,111
7,549
562
1973
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Denver
Denver
CO
—
896
6,367
—
896
6,367
7,263
6,664
599
1963
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Coral Gables
Coral Gables
FL
—
1,071
5,348
—
1,071
5,348
6,419
4,724
1,695
1956
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida Ft. Lauderdale
Fort Lauderdale
FL
—
1,758
14,080
—
1,758
14,080
15,838
13,282
2,556
N/A
1989
30 years
Kindred Hospital - North Florida
Green Cove Springs
FL
—
145
4,613
—
145
4,613
4,758
4,247
511
1956
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Hollywood
Hollywood
FL
—
605
5,229
—
605
5,229
5,834
5,220
614
1937
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Bay Area St. Petersburg
St. Petersburg
FL
—
1,401
16,706
—
1,401
16,706
18,107
13,624
4,483
1968
1997
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Central Tampa
Tampa
FL
—
2,732
7,676
—
2,732
7,676
10,408
4,760
5,648
1970
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (North Campus)
Chicago
IL
—
1,583
19,980
—
1,583
19,980
21,563
18,697
2,866
1949
1995
25 years
Kindred - Chicago - Lakeshore
Chicago
IL
—
1,513
9,525
—
1,513
9,525
11,038
9,381
1,657
1995
1976
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (Northlake Campus)
Northlake
IL
—
850
6,498
—
850
6,498
7,348
5,609
1,739
1960
1991
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Sycamore
Sycamore
IL
—
77
8,549
—
77
8,549
8,626
7,732
894
1949
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Indianapolis
Indianapolis
IN
—
985
3,801
—
985
3,801
4,786
3,243
1,543
1955
1993
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Louisville
Louisville
KY
—
3,041
12,279
—
3,041
12,279
15,320
11,776
3,544
1964
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - New Orleans
New Orleans
LA
—
648
4,971
—
648
4,971
5,619
4,330
1,289
1968
1978
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Boston
Brighton
MA
—
1,551
9,796
—
1,551
9,796
11,347
9,003
2,344
1930
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - Boston North Shore
Peabody
MA
—
543
7,568
—
543
7,568
8,111
5,418
2,693
1974
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Kansas City
Kansas City
MO
—
277
2,914
—
277
2,914
3,191
2,561
630
N/A
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - St. Louis
St. Louis
MO
—
1,126
2,087
—
1,126
2,087
3,213
1,830
1,383
1984
1991
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Greensboro
Greensboro
NC
—
1,010
7,586
—
1,010
7,586
8,596
7,490
1,106
1964
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Albuquerque
Albuquerque
NM
—
11
4,253
—
11
4,253
4,264
2,713
1,551
1985
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Las Vegas (Sahara)
Las Vegas
NV
—
1,110
2,177
—
1,110
2,177
3,287
1,299
1,988
1980
1994
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Oklahoma City
Oklahoma City
OK
—
293
5,607
—
293
5,607
5,900
4,368
1,532
1958
1993
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Pittsburgh
Oakdale
PA
—
662
12,854
—
662
12,854
13,516
9,398
4,118
1972
1996
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Philadelphia
Philadelphia
PA
—
135
5,223
—
135
5,223
5,358
3,072
2,286
N/A
1995
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Chattanooga
Chattanooga
TN
—
756
4,415
—
756
4,415
5,171
3,915
1,256
1975
1993
22 years
Kindred Hospital - Tarrant County (Fort Worth Southwest)
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,342
7,458
—
2,342
7,458
9,800
7,352
2,448
1987
1986
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Fort Worth
Fort Worth
TX
—
648
10,608
—
648
10,608
11,256
8,506
2,750
1960
1994
34 years
Kindred Hospital (Houston Northwest)
Houston
TX
—
1,699
6,788
—
1,699
6,788
8,487
5,238
3,249
1986
1985
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Houston
Houston
TX
—
33
7,062
—
33
7,062
7,095
6,575
520
N/A
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Mansfield
Mansfield
TX
—
267
2,462
—
267
2,462
2,729
1,843
886
1983
1990
40 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
Kindred Hospital - San Antonio
San Antonio
TX
—
249
11,413
—
249
11,413
11,662
8,445
3,217
1981
1993
30 years
TOTAL FOR KINDRED HOSPITALS
—
38,172
272,960
—
38,172
272,960
311,132
236,311
74,821
NON-KINDRED HOSPITALS
Southern Arizone Rehab
Tucson
AZ
—
770
25,589
—
770
25,589
26,359
2,673
23,686
1992
2011
35 years
HealthBridge Children's Hospital
Orange
CA
—
1,330
9,317
—
1,330
9,317
10,647
1,002
9,645
2000
2011
35 years
HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital
Tustin
CA
—
2,810
25,248
—
2,810
25,248
28,058
2,688
25,370
1991
2011
35 years
Gateway Rehabilitation Hospital at Florence
Florence
KY
—
3,600
4,924
—
3,600
4,924
8,524
1,149
7,375
2001
2006
35 years
University Hospitals Rehabilitation Hospital
Beachwood
OH
—
1,800
16,444
—
1,800
16,444
18,244
827
17,417
2013
2012
35 years
The Ranch/Touchstone
Conroe
TX
—
2,710
28,428
8,500
2,710
36,928
39,638
2,999
36,639
1992
2011
35 years
Highlands Regional Rehabilitation Hospital
El Paso
TX
—
1,900
23,616
—
1,900
23,616
25,516
5,510
20,006
1999
2006
35 years
Houston Children's Hospital
Houston
TX
—
1,800
15,770
—
1,800
15,770
17,570
1,676
15,894
1999
2011
35 years
Beacon Specialty Hospital
Spring
TX
—
960
6,498
—
960
6,498
7,458
708
6,750
1995
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR NON-KINDRED HOSPITALS
—
17,680
155,834
8,500
17,680
164,334
182,014
19,232
162,782
TOTAL FOR HOSPITALS
—
55,852
428,794
8,500
55,852
437,294
493,146
255,543
237,603
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
BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Wellington Place at Muscle Shoals
Muscle Shoals
AL
—
340
4,017
—
340
4,017
4,357
511
3,846
1999
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Chandler
Chandler
AZ
—
2,000
6,538
—
2,000
6,538
8,538
784
7,754
1998
2011
35 years
Park Regency Premier Club
Chandler
AZ
—
2,260
19,338
—
2,260
19,338
21,598
2,531
19,067
1992
2011
35 years
The Springs of East Mesa
Mesa
AZ
—
2,747
24,918
—
2,747
24,918
27,665
8,902
18,763
1986
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Mesa
Mesa
AZ
—
655
6,998
—
655
6,998
7,653
2,475
5,178
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Oro Valley
Oro Valley
AZ
—
666
6,169
—
666
6,169
6,835
2,182
4,653
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Peoria
Peoria
AZ
—
598
4,872
—
598
4,872
5,470
1,723
3,747
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,438
3,239
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House on East Speedway
Tucson
AZ
—
506
4,745
—
506
4,745
5,251
1,678
3,573
1998
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Fairwood Manor
Anaheim
CA
—
2,464
7,908
—
2,464
7,908
10,372
2,501
7,871
1977
2005
35 years
Woodside Terrace
Redwood City
CA
—
7,669
66,691
—
7,669
66,691
74,360
24,066
50,294
1988
2005
35 years
The Atrium
San Jose
CA
—
6,240
66,329
8,970
6,240
75,299
81,539
22,886
58,653
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Place
San Marcos
CA
—
4,288
36,204
—
4,288
36,204
40,492
13,159
27,333
1987
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Heritage Place
Tracy
CA
—
1,110
13,296
—
1,110
13,296
14,406
3,864
10,542
1986
2005
35 years
Ridge Point Assisted Living Inn
Boulder
CO
—
1,290
20,683
—
1,290
20,683
21,973
2,301
19,672
1985
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs
CO
—
715
9,279
—
715
9,279
9,994
3,282
6,712
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Pueblo
Pueblo
CO
5,012
840
9,403
—
840
9,403
10,243
3,326
6,917
1997
2005
35 years
The Gables at Farmington
Farmington
CT
—
3,995
36,310
—
3,995
36,310
40,305
12,966
27,339
1984
2005
35 years
Emeritus at South Windsor
South Windsor
CT
—
2,187
12,682
—
2,187
12,682
14,869
3,937
10,932
1999
2004
35 years
Chatfield
West Hartford
CT
—
2,493
22,833
1,644
2,493
24,477
26,970
8,139
18,831
1989
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Bonita Springs
Bonita Springs
FL
9,029
1,540
10,783
—
1,540
10,783
12,323
3,756
8,567
1989
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach
FL
13,838
2,317
16,218
—
2,317
16,218
18,535
5,471
13,064
1999
2005
35 years
Emeritus at Deer Creek
Deerfield Beach
FL
—
1,399
9,791
—
1,399
9,791
11,190
3,649
7,541
1999
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,510
7,862
—
1,510
7,862
9,372
871
8,501
1996
2011
35 years
Wellington Place at Ft Walton
Fort Walton Beach
FL
—
2,610
11,041
—
2,610
11,041
13,651
1,221
12,430
2000
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Merrimac
Jacksonville
FL
—
860
16,745
—
860
16,745
17,605
1,775
15,830
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Jacksonville
Jacksonville
FL
—
1,300
9,659
—
1,300
9,659
10,959
1,054
9,905
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Jensen Beach
Jensen Beach
FL
12,417
1,831
12,820
—
1,831
12,820
14,651
4,450
10,201
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Ormond Beach
Ormond Beach
FL
—
1,660
9,738
—
1,660
9,738
11,398
1,071
10,327
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Palm Coast
Palm Coast
FL
—
470
9,187
—
470
9,187
9,657
1,020
8,637
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
633
6,087
—
633
6,087
6,720
2,153
4,567
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Englewood (FL)
Rotonda West
FL
—
1,740
4,331
—
1,740
4,331
6,071
580
5,491
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Tallahassee
Tallahassee
FL
4,451
667
6,168
—
667
6,168
6,835
2,182
4,653
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Tavares
Tavares
FL
—
280
15,980
—
280
15,980
16,260
1,702
14,558
1997
2011
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
Clare Bridge of West Melbourne
West Melbourne
FL
6,343
586
5,481
—
586
5,481
6,067
1,939
4,128
2000
2005
35 years
The Classic at West Palm Beach
West Palm Beach
FL
25,512
3,758
33,072
—
3,758
33,072
36,830
11,901
24,929
1990
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Winter Haven
Winter Haven
FL
—
232
3,006
—
232
3,006
3,238
1,063
2,175
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Winter Haven
Winter Haven
FL
—
438
5,549
—
438
5,549
5,987
1,963
4,024
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Twin Falls
Twin Falls
ID
—
703
6,153
—
703
6,153
6,856
2,176
4,680
1997
2005
35 years
The Hallmark
Chicago
IL
—
11,057
107,517
3,266
11,057
110,783
121,840
38,314
83,526
1990
2005
35 years
The Kenwood of Lake View
Chicago
IL
—
3,072
26,668
—
3,072
26,668
29,740
9,628
20,112
1950
2005
35 years
The Heritage
Des Plaines
IL
32,000
6,871
60,165
—
6,871
60,165
67,036
21,676
45,360
1993
2005
35 years
Devonshire of Hoffman Estates
Hoffman Estates
IL
—
3,886
44,130
—
3,886
44,130
48,016
15,025
32,991
1987
2005
35 years
The Devonshire
Lisle
IL
33,000
7,953
70,400
—
7,953
70,400
78,353
25,297
53,056
1990
2005
35 years
Seasons at Glenview
Northbrook
IL
—
1,988
39,762
—
1,988
39,762
41,750
12,671
29,079
1999
2004
35 years
Hawthorn Lakes
Vernon Hills
IL
—
4,439
35,044
—
4,439
35,044
39,483
12,956
26,527
1987
2005
35 years
The Willows
Vernon Hills
IL
—
1,147
10,041
—
1,147
10,041
11,188
3,618
7,570
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Evansville
Evansville
IN
3,571
357
3,765
—
357
3,765
4,122
1,332
2,790
1998
2005
35 years
Berkshire of Castleton
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,280
11,515
—
1,280
11,515
12,795
4,122
8,673
1986
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Marion
Marion
IN
—
207
3,570
—
207
3,570
3,777
1,263
2,514
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Portage
Portage
IN
—
128
3,649
—
128
3,649
3,777
1,291
2,486
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Richmond
Richmond
IN
—
495
4,124
—
495
4,124
4,619
1,459
3,160
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Derby
Derby
KS
—
440
4,422
—
440
4,422
4,862
502
4,360
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Leawood
Leawood
KS
3,637
117
5,127
—
117
5,127
5,244
1,814
3,430
2000
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Salina II
Salina
KS
—
300
5,657
—
300
5,657
5,957
646
5,311
1996
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Topeka
Topeka
KS
4,870
370
6,825
—
370
6,825
7,195
2,414
4,781
2000
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Wellington
Wellington
KS
—
310
2,434
—
310
2,434
2,744
303
2,441
1994
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Farm Pond
Framingham
MA
—
5,819
33,361
1,894
5,819
35,255
41,074
9,852
31,222
1999
2004
35 years
Emeritus at Cape Cod (WhiteHall)
Hyannis
MA
6,372
1,277
9,063
—
1,277
9,063
10,340
2,594
7,746
1999
2005
35 years
River Bay Club
Quincy
MA
—
6,101
57,862
—
6,101
57,862
63,963
20,462
43,501
1986
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Davison
Davison
MI
—
160
3,189
2,543
160
5,732
5,892
717
5,175
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Delta Charter
Delta Township
MI
—
730
11,471
—
730
11,471
12,201
1,246
10,955
1998
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Delta Charter
Delta Township
MI
—
820
3,313
—
820
3,313
4,133
505
3,628
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Farmington Hills I
Farmington Hills
MI
—
580
10,497
—
580
10,497
11,077
1,283
9,794
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Farmington Hills II
Farmington Hills
MI
—
700
10,246
—
700
10,246
10,946
1,300
9,646
1994
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Meridian Lansing II
Haslett
MI
—
1,340
6,134
—
1,340
6,134
7,474
756
6,718
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Grand Blanc I
Holly
MI
—
450
12,373
—
450
12,373
12,823
1,350
11,473
1998
2011
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
Wynwood of Grand Blanc II
Holly
MI
—
620
14,627
—
620
14,627
15,247
1,618
13,629
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Northville
Northville
MI
7,161
407
6,068
—
407
6,068
6,475
2,146
4,329
1996
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Troy I
Troy
MI
—
630
17,178
—
630
17,178
17,808
1,848
15,960
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Troy II
Troy
MI
—
950
12,503
—
950
12,503
13,453
1,451
12,002
1998
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Utica
Utica
MI
—
1,142
11,808
—
1,142
11,808
12,950
4,177
8,773
1996
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Utica
Utica
MI
—
700
8,657
—
700
8,657
9,357
1,004
8,353
1995
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Blaine
Blaine
MN
—
150
1,675
—
150
1,675
1,825
593
1,232
1997
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie
MN
—
301
6,228
—
301
6,228
6,529
2,203
4,326
1998
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Faribault
Faribault
MN
—
530
1,085
—
530
1,085
1,615
156
1,459
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Inver Grove Heights
Inver Grove Heights
MN
2,825
253
2,655
—
253
2,655
2,908
939
1,969
1997
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
490
410
—
490
410
900
113
787
1996
2011
35 years
Edina Park Plaza
Minneapolis
MN
15,040
3,621
33,141
7,271
3,621
40,412
44,033
11,816
32,217
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of North Oaks
North Oaks
MN
—
1,057
8,296
—
1,057
8,296
9,353
2,934
6,419
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Plymouth
Plymouth
MN
—
679
8,675
—
679
8,675
9,354
3,068
6,286
1998
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Sauk Rapids
Sauk Rapids
MN
—
480
3,178
—
480
3,178
3,658
369
3,289
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Wilmar
Wilmar
MN
—
470
4,833
—
470
4,833
5,303
531
4,772
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Winona
Winona
MN
—
800
1,390
—
800
1,390
2,190
312
1,878
1997
2011
35 years
The Solana West County
Ballwin
MO
—
3,100
35,074
—
3,100
35,074
38,174
470
37,704
2012
2014
35 years
Wellington Place of Greenville
Greenville
MS
—
600
1,522
—
600
1,522
2,122
258
1,864
1999
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Cary
Cary
NC
—
724
6,466
—
724
6,466
7,190
2,287
4,903
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Hickory
Hickory
NC
—
330
10,981
—
330
10,981
11,311
1,196
10,115
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Winston-Salem
Winston-Salem
NC
—
368
3,497
—
368
3,497
3,865
1,237
2,628
1997
2005
35 years
Brendenwood
Voorhees Township
NJ
17,770
3,158
29,909
—
3,158
29,909
33,067
10,580
22,487
1987
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Westampton
Westampton
NJ
—
881
4,741
—
881
4,741
5,622
1,677
3,945
1997
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Deptford
Woodbury
NJ
—
1,190
5,482
—
1,190
5,482
6,672
665
6,007
1998
2011
35 years
Ponce de Leon
Santa Fe
NM
—
—
28,178
—
—
28,178
28,178
9,697
18,481
1986
2005
35 years
Westwood Assisted Living
Sparks
NV
—
1,040
7,376
—
1,040
7,376
8,416
1,015
7,401
1991
2011
35 years
Westwood Active Retirement
Sparks
NV
—
1,520
9,280
—
1,520
9,280
10,800
1,353
9,447
1993
2011
35 years
Wynwood of Kenmore
Buffalo
NY
13,352
1,487
15,170
—
1,487
15,170
16,657
5,366
11,291
1995
2005
35 years
Villas of Sherman Brook
Clinton
NY
—
947
7,528
—
947
7,528
8,475
2,663
5,812
1991
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Liberty (Manlius)
Manlius
NY
—
890
28,237
—
890
28,237
29,127
3,010
26,117
1994
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Perinton
Pittsford
NY
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,438
3,239
1997
2005
35 years
The Gables at Brighton
Rochester
NY
—
1,131
9,498
—
1,131
9,498
10,629
3,457
7,172
1988
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
—
1,021
8,333
—
1,021
8,333
9,354
2,947
6,407
1997
2005
35 years
Wynwood of Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
16,758
1,884
16,103
—
1,884
16,103
17,987
5,696
12,291
1996
2005
35 years
Villas of Summerfield
Syracuse
NY
—
1,132
11,434
—
1,132
11,434
12,566
4,044
8,522
1991
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Williamsville
Williamsville
NY
6,903
839
3,841
—
839
3,841
4,680
1,359
3,321
1997
2005
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
Sterling House of Alliance
Alliance
OH
2,263
392
6,283
—
392
6,283
6,675
2,222
4,453
1998
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of Austintown
Austintown
OH
—
151
3,087
—
151
3,087
3,238
1,092
2,146
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Barberton
Barberton
OH
—
440
10,884
—
440
10,884
11,324
1,186
10,138
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Beaver Creek
Beavercreek
OH
—
587
5,381
—
587
5,381
5,968
1,903
4,065
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Englewood (OH)
Clayton
OH
—
630
6,477
—
630
6,477
7,107
745
6,362
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Lakeview
Columbus
OH
—
770
11,220
—
770
11,220
11,990
1,310
10,680
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Westerville
Columbus
OH
1,857
267
3,600
—
267
3,600
3,867
1,274
2,593
1999
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Greenville
Greenville
OH
—
490
4,144
—
490
4,144
4,634
562
4,072
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Lancaster
Lancaster
OH
—
460
4,662
—
460
4,662
5,122
564
4,558
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Marion
Marion
OH
—
620
3,306
—
620
3,306
3,926
432
3,494
1998
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Camelot Place
Medina
OH
—
340
21,566
—
340
21,566
21,906
2,377
19,529
1995
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Medina
Medina
OH
—
1,110
24,700
—
1,110
24,700
25,810
2,685
23,125
2000
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Hillenvale
Mount Vernon
OH
—
1,100
12,493
—
1,100
12,493
13,593
1,443
12,150
2001
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Salem
Salem
OH
—
634
4,659
—
634
4,659
5,293
1,648
3,645
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Springdale
Springdale
OH
—
1,140
9,134
—
1,140
9,134
10,274
1,011
9,263
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at North Hills
Zanesville
OH
—
1,560
11,067
—
1,560
11,067
12,627
1,322
11,305
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Bartlesville
Bartlesville
OK
—
250
10,529
—
250
10,529
10,779
1,129
9,650
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Bethany
Bethany
OK
—
390
1,499
—
390
1,499
1,889
213
1,676
1994
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Broken Arrow
Broken Arrow
OK
—
940
6,312
6,410
1,873
11,789
13,662
996
12,666
1996
2011
35 years
Forest Grove Residential Community
Forest Grove
OR
—
2,320
9,633
—
2,320
9,633
11,953
1,176
10,777
1994
2011
35 years
The Heritage at Mt. Hood
Gresham
OR
—
2,410
9,093
—
2,410
9,093
11,503
1,110
10,393
1988
2011
35 years
McMinnville Residential Estates
McMinnville
OR
1,771
1,230
7,561
—
1,230
7,561
8,791
1,025
7,766
1989
2011
35 years
Homewood Residence at Deane Hill
Knoxville
TN
—
1,150
15,705
—
1,150
15,705
16,855
1,844
15,011
2001
2011
35 years
Wellington Place at Newport
Newport
TN
—
820
4,046
—
820
4,046
4,866
518
4,348
2000
2011
35 years
Trinity Towers
Corpus Christi
TX
—
1,920
71,661
—
1,920
71,661
73,581
7,809
65,772
1985
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Denton
Denton
TX
—
1,750
6,712
—
1,750
6,712
8,462
753
7,709
1996
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Ennis
Ennis
TX
—
460
3,284
—
460
3,284
3,744
404
3,340
1996
2011
35 years
Broadway Plaza at Westover Hill
Fort Worth
TX
—
1,660
25,703
—
1,660
25,703
27,363
2,796
24,567
2001
2011
35 years
Hampton at Pinegate
Houston
TX
—
3,440
15,913
—
3,440
15,913
19,353
1,830
17,523
1998
2011
35 years
Hampton at Shadowlake
Houston
TX
—
2,520
13,770
—
2,520
13,770
16,290
1,615
14,675
1999
2011
35 years
Hampton at Spring Shadow
Houston
TX
—
1,250
15,760
—
1,250
15,760
17,010
1,754
15,256
1999
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Kerrville
Kerrville
TX
—
460
8,548
—
460
8,548
9,008
933
8,075
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Lancaster
Lancaster
TX
—
410
1,478
—
410
1,478
1,888
230
1,658
1997
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Paris
Paris
TX
—
360
2,411
—
360
2,411
2,771
323
2,448
1996
2011
35 years
Hampton at Pearland
Pearland
TX
—
1,250
12,869
—
1,250
12,869
14,119
1,500
12,619
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of San Antonio
San Antonio
TX
—
1,400
10,051
—
1,400
10,051
11,451
1,115
10,336
1997
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
Sterling House of Temple
Temple
TX
—
330
5,081
—
330
5,081
5,411
599
4,812
1997
2011
35 years
Emeritus at Ridgewood Gardens
Salem
VA
—
1,900
16,219
—
1,900
16,219
18,119
5,238
12,881
1998
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge of Lynwood
Lynnwood
WA
—
1,219
9,573
—
1,219
9,573
10,792
3,386
7,406
1999
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Puyallup
Puyallup
WA
9,732
1,055
8,298
—
1,055
8,298
9,353
2,935
6,418
1998
2005
35 years
Columbia Edgewater
Richland
WA
—
960
23,270
—
960
23,270
24,230
2,613
21,617
1990
2011
35 years
Park Place
Spokane
WA
—
1,622
12,895
—
1,622
12,895
14,517
4,759
9,758
1915
2005
35 years
Crossings at Allenmore
Tacoma
WA
—
620
16,186
—
620
16,186
16,806
1,756
15,050
1997
2011
35 years
Union Park at Allenmore
Tacoma
WA
—
1,710
3,326
—
1,710
3,326
5,036
586
4,450
1988
2011
35 years
Crossings at Yakima
Yakima
WA
—
860
15,276
—
860
15,276
16,136
1,709
14,427
1998
2011
35 years
Sterling House of Fond du Lac
Fond du Lac
WI
—
196
1,603
—
196
1,603
1,799
567
1,232
2000
2005
35 years
Clare Bridge of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
551
5,431
2,772
551
8,203
8,754
2,425
6,329
2000
2005
35 years
Woven Hearts of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
630
1,694
—
630
1,694
2,324
220
2,104
1997
2011
35 years
Clare Bridge Cottage of La Crosse
La Crosse
WI
—
621
4,056
1,126
621
5,182
5,803
1,640
4,163
2004
2005
35 years
Sterling House of La Crosse
La Crosse
WI
—
644
5,831
2,637
644
8,468
9,112
2,544
6,568
1998
2005
35 years
Sterling House of Middleton
Middleton
WI
—
360
5,041
—
360
5,041
5,401
555
4,846
1997
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Neenah
Neenah
WI
—
340
1,030
—
340
1,030
1,370
151
1,219
1996
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Onalaska
Onalaska
WI
—
250
4,949
—
250
4,949
5,199
542
4,657
1995
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Oshkosh
Oshkosh
WI
—
160
1,904
—
160
1,904
2,064
241
1,823
1996
2011
35 years
Woven Hearts of Sun Prairie
Sun Prairie
WI
—
350
1,131
—
350
1,131
1,481
161
1,320
1994
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
255,484
218,194
2,112,392
38,533
219,127
2,149,992
2,369,119
546,213
1,822,906
SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Sunrise of Chandler
Chandler
AZ
—
4,344
14,455
246
4,439
14,606
19,045
1,423
17,622
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Scottsdale
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,229
27,575
466
2,255
28,015
30,270
6,570
23,700
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of River Road
Tucson
AZ
—
2,971
12,399
65
2,971
12,464
15,435
1,117
14,318
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Lynn Valley
Vancouver
BC
—
11,759
37,424
(6,469
)
10,057
32,657
42,714
7,599
35,115
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Vancouver
Vancouver
BC
—
6,649
31,937
445
6,663
32,368
39,031
7,992
31,039
2005
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Victoria
Victoria
BC
—
8,332
29,970
(4,863
)
7,144
26,295
33,439
6,261
27,178
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise at La Costa
Carlsbad
CA
—
4,890
20,590
1,067
4,960
21,587
26,547
5,607
20,940
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Carmichael
Carmichael
CA
—
1,269
14,598
210
1,269
14,808
16,077
1,368
14,709
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Fair Oaks
Fair Oaks
CA
10,452
1,456
23,679
1,471
2,265
24,341
26,606
6,049
20,557
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,802
24,560
1,036
3,827
25,571
29,398
6,346
23,052
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Canyon Crest
Riverside
CA
—
5,486
19,658
1,023
5,530
20,637
26,167
5,186
20,981
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rocklin
Rocklin
CA
—
1,378
23,565
651
1,413
24,181
25,594
5,734
19,860
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of San Mateo
San Mateo
CA
—
2,682
35,335
1,255
2,686
36,586
39,272
8,570
30,702
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
2,933
34,361
715
2,948
35,061
38,009
8,278
29,731
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Sterling Canyon
Valencia
CA
16,495
3,868
29,293
3,811
3,966
33,006
36,972
8,289
28,683
1998
2007
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
Sunrise of Westlake Village
Westlake Village
CA
—
4,935
30,722
842
5,006
31,493
36,499
7,406
29,093
2004
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda
CA
—
1,689
25,240
1,066
1,714
26,281
27,995
6,163
21,832
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Cherry Creek
Denver
CO
—
1,621
28,370
836
1,703
29,124
30,827
7,027
23,800
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Pinehurst
Denver
CO
—
1,417
30,885
1,457
1,431
32,328
33,759
8,040
25,719
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Orchard
Littleton
CO
10,382
1,813
22,183
1,040
1,846
23,190
25,036
5,825
19,211
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westminster
Westminster
CO
7,432
2,649
16,243
1,020
2,686
17,226
19,912
4,299
15,613
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Stamford
Stamford
CT
—
4,612
28,533
1,228
4,646
29,727
34,373
7,511
26,862
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Jacksonville
Jacksonville
FL
—
2,390
17,671
39
2,405
17,695
20,100
1,674
18,426
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Ivey Ridge
Alpharetta
GA
5,064
1,507
18,516
908
1,513
19,418
20,931
4,949
15,982
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Huntcliff I
Atlanta
GA
30,197
4,232
66,161
13,563
4,226
79,730
83,956
17,802
66,154
1987
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Huntcliff II
Atlanta
GA
4,864
2,154
17,137
1,577
2,160
18,708
20,868
4,667
16,201
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at East Cobb
Marietta
GA
9,330
1,797
23,420
1,248
1,799
24,666
26,465
5,970
20,495
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Barrington
Barrington
IL
—
859
15,085
248
859
15,333
16,192
1,442
14,750
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomingdale
Bloomingdale
IL
—
1,287
38,625
1,289
1,382
39,819
41,201
9,430
31,771
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Buffalo Grove
Buffalo Grove
IL
—
2,154
28,021
824
2,251
28,748
30,999
7,076
23,923
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lincoln Park
Chicago
IL
—
3,485
26,687
534
3,504
27,202
30,706
6,304
24,402
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Naperville
Naperville
IL
—
1,946
28,538
1,711
1,990
30,205
32,195
7,451
24,744
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Palos Park
Palos Park
IL
18,651
2,363
42,205
893
2,369
43,092
45,461
10,271
35,190
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Park Ridge
Park Ridge
IL
—
5,533
39,557
1,831
5,612
41,309
46,921
9,592
37,329
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Willowbrook
Willowbrook
IL
18,515
1,454
60,738
1,934
2,047
62,079
64,126
13,030
51,096
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Old Meridian
Carmel
IN
—
8,550
31,746
43
8,550
31,789
40,339
2,995
37,344
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Leawood
Leawood
KS
—
651
16,401
317
719
16,650
17,369
1,426
15,943
2006
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Overland Park
Overland Park
KS
—
650
11,015
308
651
11,322
11,973
1,070
10,903
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge
LA
7,972
1,212
23,547
1,160
1,253
24,666
25,919
5,889
20,030
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Arlington
Arlington
MA
17,077
86
34,393
712
107
35,084
35,191
8,609
26,582
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Norwood
Norwood
MA
—
2,230
30,968
1,509
2,269
32,438
34,707
7,666
27,041
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Columbia
Columbia
MD
—
1,780
23,083
1,682
1,855
24,690
26,545
5,966
20,579
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rockville
Rockville
MD
—
1,039
39,216
990
1,066
40,179
41,245
9,238
32,007
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomfield
Bloomfield Hills
MI
—
3,736
27,657
1,296
3,742
28,947
32,689
6,887
25,802
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cascade
Grand Rapids
MI
—
1,273
21,782
112
1,284
21,883
23,167
1,980
21,187
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Northville
Plymouth
MI
—
1,445
26,090
860
1,525
26,870
28,395
6,653
21,742
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rochester
Rochester
MI
—
2,774
38,666
1,003
2,778
39,665
42,443
9,427
33,016
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Troy
Troy
MI
—
1,758
23,727
577
1,833
24,229
26,062
6,001
20,061
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Edina
Edina
MN
8,809
3,181
24,224
2,287
3,212
26,480
29,692
6,481
23,211
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise on Providence
Charlotte
NC
—
1,976
19,472
1,524
1,988
20,984
22,972
5,021
17,951
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at North Hills
Raleigh
NC
—
749
37,091
3,411
762
40,489
41,251
9,451
31,800
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of East Brunswick
East Brunswick
NJ
—
2,784
26,173
1,432
3,031
27,358
30,389
6,976
23,413
1999
2007
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
Sunrise of Jackson
Jackson
NJ
—
4,009
15,029
174
4,014
15,198
19,212
1,497
17,715
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Morris Plains
Morris Plains
NJ
18,473
1,492
32,052
1,471
1,517
33,498
35,015
7,906
27,109
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Old Tappan
Old Tappan
NJ
17,156
2,985
36,795
1,446
3,033
38,193
41,226
9,028
32,198
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wall
Wall Township
NJ
9,443
1,053
19,101
627
1,063
19,718
20,781
4,973
15,808
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wayne
Wayne
NJ
13,627
1,288
24,990
1,360
1,352
26,286
27,638
6,372
21,266
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westfield
Westfield
NJ
18,058
5,057
23,803
1,457
5,117
25,200
30,317
6,173
24,144
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Woodcliff Lake
Woodcliff Lake
NJ
—
3,493
30,801
984
3,537
31,741
35,278
7,853
27,425
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of North Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
4,622
38,087
1,396
4,700
39,405
44,105
9,917
34,188
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Fleetwood
Mount Vernon
NY
—
4,381
28,434
1,776
4,400
30,191
34,591
7,439
27,152
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of New City
New City
NY
—
1,906
27,323
935
1,948
28,216
30,164
6,947
23,217
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Smithtown
Smithtown
NY
12,727
2,853
25,621
1,509
3,038
26,945
29,983
7,123
22,860
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Staten Island
Staten Island
NY
—
7,237
23,910
(21
)
7,284
23,842
31,126
7,462
23,664
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Parma
Cleveland
OH
—
695
16,641
912
806
17,442
18,248
4,230
14,018
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cuyahoga Falls
Cuyahoga Falls
OH
—
626
10,239
778
631
11,012
11,643
2,795
8,848
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Aurora
Aurora
ON
—
1,570
36,113
(4,750
)
1,349
31,584
32,933
7,459
25,474
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Burlington
Burlington
ON
—
1,173
24,448
455
1,193
24,883
26,076
5,809
20,267
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Unionville
Markham
ON
—
2,322
41,140
(5,300
)
2,038
36,124
38,162
8,417
29,745
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mississauga
Mississauga
ON
—
3,554
33,631
(4,412
)
3,080
29,693
32,773
6,915
25,858
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Erin Mills
Mississauga
ON
—
1,957
27,020
(3,670
)
1,676
23,631
25,307
5,938
19,369
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Oakville
Oakville
ON
—
2,753
37,489
641
2,756
38,127
40,883
8,779
32,104
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond Hill
Richmond Hill
ON
—
2,155
41,254
(5,486
)
1,850
36,073
37,923
8,266
29,657
2002
2007
35 years
Thorne Mill of Steeles
Vaughan
ON
—
2,563
57,513
(5,551
)
1,251
53,274
54,525
11,357
43,168
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Windsor
Windsor
ON
—
1,813
20,882
587
1,836
21,446
23,282
5,087
18,195
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Abington
Abington
PA
23,207
1,838
53,660
3,069
1,980
56,587
58,567
13,247
45,320
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Blue Bell
Blue Bell
PA
—
1,765
23,920
1,877
1,814
25,748
27,562
6,427
21,135
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Exton
Exton
PA
—
1,123
17,765
1,171
1,155
18,904
20,059
4,734
15,325
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Haverford
Haverford
PA
7,281
941
25,872
1,419
962
27,270
28,232
6,481
21,751
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Granite Run
Media
PA
11,206
1,272
31,781
1,739
1,341
33,451
34,792
7,800
26,992
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westtown
West Chester
PA
—
1,547
22,996
1,116
1,566
24,093
25,659
6,319
19,340
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lower Makefield
Yardley
PA
—
3,165
21,337
198
3,165
21,535
24,700
2,024
22,676
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Hillcrest
Dallas
TX
—
2,616
27,680
444
2,626
28,114
30,740
6,801
23,939
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Fort Worth
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,024
18,587
316
2,017
18,910
20,927
1,747
19,180
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Frisco
Frisco
TX
—
2,523
14,547
108
2,535
14,643
17,178
1,224
15,954
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Cinco Ranch
Katy
TX
—
2,512
21,600
333
2,538
21,907
24,445
2,003
22,442
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Holladay
Holladay
UT
—
2,542
44,771
241
2,542
45,012
47,554
4,070
43,484
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Sandy
Sandy
UT
—
2,576
22,987
(66
)
2,618
22,879
25,497
5,655
19,842
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Alexandria
Alexandria
VA
5,185
88
14,811
1,312
171
16,040
16,211
4,374
11,837
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond
Richmond
VA
—
1,120
17,446
1,054
1,148
18,472
19,620
4,702
14,918
1999
2007
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
Sunrise of Bon Air
Richmond
VA
—
2,047
22,079
293
2,032
22,387
24,419
2,089
22,330
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Springfield
Springfield
VA
8,337
4,440
18,834
2,210
4,454
21,030
25,484
4,999
20,485
1997
2007
35 years
TOTAL FOR SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
309,940
245,515
2,532,176
58,592
244,300
2,591,983
2,836,283
576,492
2,259,791
ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Arbour Lake
Calgary
AB
—
2,512
39,188
—
2,512
39,188
41,700
460
41,240
2003
2014
35 years
Canyon Meadows
Calgary
AB
—
1,617
30,803
—
1,617
30,803
32,420
371
32,049
1995
2014
35 years
Churchill Manor
Edmonton
AB
—
2,865
30,482
—
2,865
30,482
33,347
374
32,973
1999
2014
35 years
View at Lethbridge
Lethbridge
AB
—
2,503
24,770
—
2,503
24,770
27,273
325
26,948
2007
2014
35 years
Victoria Park
Red Deer
AB
9,952
1,188
22,554
—
1,188
22,554
23,742
298
23,444
1999
2014
35 years
Ironwood Estates
St. Albert
AB
—
3,639
22,519
—
3,639
22,519
26,158
295
25,863
1998
2014
35 years
Atria Regency
Mobile
AL
—
950
11,897
824
953
12,718
13,671
1,987
11,684
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Chandler Villas
Chandler
AZ
7,570
3,650
8,450
873
3,692
9,281
12,973
2,004
10,969
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Sierra Pointe
Scottsdale
AZ
—
10,930
65,372
—
10,930
65,372
76,302
887
75,415
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Campana Del Rio
Tucson
AZ
—
5,861
37,284
1,072
5,896
38,321
44,217
5,712
38,505
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Valley Manor
Tucson
AZ
—
1,709
60
288
1,709
348
2,057
148
1,909
1963
2011
35 years
Atria Bell Court Gardens
Tucson
AZ
18,170
3,010
30,969
537
3,016
31,500
34,516
4,190
30,326
1964
2011
35 years
Longlake Chateau
Nanaimo
BC
10,401
1,874
22,910
—
1,874
22,910
24,784
304
24,480
1990
2014
35 years
Prince George
Prince George
BC
10,239
2,066
22,761
—
2,066
22,761
24,827
305
24,522
2005
2014
35 years
The Victorian
Victoria
BC
—
3,419
16,351
—
3,419
16,351
19,770
230
19,540
1988
2014
35 years
Victorian at McKenzie
Victoria
BC
—
4,801
25,712
—
4,801
25,712
30,513
329
30,184
2003
2014
35 years
Atria Burlingame
Burlingame
CA
7,291
2,494
12,373
738
2,523
13,082
15,605
1,870
13,735
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Las Posas
Camarillo
CA
—
4,500
28,436
509
4,508
28,937
33,445
3,771
29,674
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Carmichael Oaks
Carmichael
CA
18,993
2,118
49,694
632
2,128
50,316
52,444
2,569
49,875
1992
2013
35 years
Atria El Camino Gardens
Carmichael
CA
—
6,930
32,318
1,660
6,971
33,937
40,908
4,608
36,300
1984
2011
35 years
Atria Covina
Covina
CA
—
170
4,131
388
184
4,505
4,689
825
3,864
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Daly City
Daly City
CA
7,425
3,090
13,448
632
3,090
14,080
17,170
1,939
15,231
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Covell Gardens
Davis
CA
18,788
2,163
39,657
7,159
2,272
46,707
48,979
5,970
43,009
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Encinitas
Encinitas
CA
—
5,880
9,212
721
5,891
9,922
15,813
1,563
14,250
1984
2011
35 years
Atria Escondido
Escondido
CA
—
1,196
7,155
—
1,196
7,155
8,351
179
8,172
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Grass Valley
Grass Valley
CA
11,840
1,965
28,414
181
1,983
28,577
30,560
1,583
28,977
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Golden Creek
Irvine
CA
—
6,900
23,544
671
6,921
24,194
31,115
3,548
27,567
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbridge
Irvine
CA
—
—
5
1,173
9
1,169
1,178
148
1,030
1997
2012
35 years
Atria Lafayette
Lafayette
CA
19,942
5,679
56,922
83
5,686
56,998
62,684
2,804
59,880
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Del Sol
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,500
12,458
3,579
3,502
16,035
19,537
1,769
17,768
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Tamalpais Creek
Novato
CA
—
5,812
24,703
417
5,827
25,105
30,932
3,329
27,603
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Pacific Palisades
Pacific Palisades
CA
7,348
4,458
17,064
863
4,461
17,924
22,385
4,715
17,670
2001
2007
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
Atria Palm Desert
Palm Desert
CA
—
2,887
9,843
876
3,100
10,506
13,606
2,594
11,012
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Hacienda
Palm Desert
CA
—
6,680
85,900
1,770
6,805
87,545
94,350
10,535
83,815
1989
2011
35 years
Atria Paradise
Paradise
CA
5,245
2,265
28,262
346
2,309
28,564
30,873
1,459
29,414
1999
2013
35 years
Atria Del Rey
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
3,290
17,427
4,380
3,446
21,651
25,097
3,809
21,288
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Collwood
San Diego
CA
—
290
10,650
444
316
11,068
11,384
1,744
9,640
1976
2011
35 years
Atria Rancho Park
San Dimas
CA
—
4,066
14,306
946
4,556
14,762
19,318
2,492
16,826
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Chateau Gardens
San Jose
CA
—
39
487
379
39
866
905
459
446
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Glen
San Jose
CA
—
8,521
43,168
1,824
8,526
44,987
53,513
4,774
48,739
1976
2011
35 years
Atria Chateau San Juan
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
5,110
29,436
7,900
5,305
37,141
42,446
6,145
36,301
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Hillsdale
San Mateo
CA
—
5,240
15,956
1,036
5,251
16,981
22,232
2,332
19,900
1986
2011
35 years
Atria Bayside Landing
Stockton
CA
—
—
467
351
—
818
818
437
381
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
6,120
30,068
3,296
6,217
33,267
39,484
4,018
35,466
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Tarzana
Tarzana
CA
—
960
47,547
301
960
47,848
48,808
2,203
46,605
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Vintage Hills
Temecula
CA
—
4,674
44,341
817
4,713
45,119
49,832
2,488
47,344
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Grand Oaks
Thousand Oaks
CA
22,350
5,994
50,309
119
6,024
50,398
56,422
2,754
53,668
2002
2013
35 years
Atria Hillcrest
Thousand Oaks
CA
—
6,020
25,635
9,187
6,612
34,230
40,842
4,920
35,922
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Montego Heights
Walnut Creek
CA
—
6,910
15,797
11,189
6,910
26,986
33,896
2,808
31,088
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Valley View
Walnut Creek
CA
17,558
7,139
53,914
1,448
7,147
55,354
62,501
10,442
52,059
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Applewood
Lakewood
CO
—
3,656
48,657
108
3,656
48,765
52,421
2,830
49,591
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Inn at Lakewood
Lakewood
CO
—
6,281
50,095
1,047
6,311
51,112
57,423
6,104
51,319
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Vistas in Longmont
Longmont
CO
—
2,807
24,877
209
2,815
25,078
27,893
2,381
25,512
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Darien
Darien
CT
19,986
653
37,587
2,415
816
39,839
40,655
5,179
35,476
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Larson Place
Hamden
CT
—
1,850
16,098
919
1,873
16,994
18,867
2,518
16,349
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Greenridge Place
Rocky Hill
CT
—
2,170
32,553
1,234
2,367
33,590
35,957
4,227
31,730
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stamford
Stamford
CT
37,188
1,200
62,432
3,304
1,373
65,563
66,936
8,365
58,571
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Stratford
Stratford
CT
—
3,210
27,865
919
3,210
28,784
31,994
3,985
28,009
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Crossroads Place
Waterford
CT
—
2,401
36,495
6,028
2,537
42,387
44,924
4,653
40,271
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Hamilton Heights
West Hartford
CT
—
3,120
14,674
1,712
3,151
16,355
19,506
2,836
16,670
1904
2011
35 years
Atria Windsor Woods
Hudson
FL
—
1,610
32,432
863
1,624
33,281
34,905
4,798
30,107
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Baypoint Village
Hudson
FL
15,912
2,083
28,841
3,801
2,139
32,586
34,725
4,773
29,952
1986
2011
35 years
Atria San Pablo
Jacksonville
FL
5,691
1,620
14,920
570
1,636
15,474
17,110
2,008
15,102
1999
2011
35 years
Atria at St. Joseph's
Jupiter
FL
16,361
5,520
30,720
225
5,543
30,922
36,465
1,646
34,819
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Meridian
Lake Worth
FL
—
—
10
755
12
753
765
136
629
1986
2012
35 years
Atria Heritage at Lake Forest
Sanford
FL
—
3,589
32,586
2,241
3,594
34,822
38,416
4,137
34,279
2002
2011
35 years
Atria Evergreen Woods
Spring Hill
FL
—
2,370
28,371
2,606
2,497
30,850
33,347
4,765
28,582
1981
2011
35 years
Atria North Point
Alpharetta
GA
42,431
4,830
78,318
—
4,830
78,318
83,148
1,824
81,324
2007
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
Atria Buckhead
Atlanta
GA
—
3,660
5,274
544
3,678
5,800
9,478
1,102
8,376
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Mableton
Austell
GA
—
1,911
18,879
97
1,912
18,975
20,887
1,108
19,779
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Johnson Ferry
Marietta
GA
—
990
6,453
212
990
6,665
7,655
1,037
6,618
1995
2011
35 years
Atria Tucker
Tucker
GA
—
1,103
20,679
127
1,103
20,806
21,909
1,197
20,712
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Glen Ellyn
Glen Ellyn
IL
—
2,455
34,064
1,597
2,475
35,641
38,116
8,633
29,483
2000
2007
35 years
Atria Newburgh
Newburgh
IN
—
1,150
22,880
401
1,150
23,281
24,431
2,965
21,466
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone East
Topeka
KS
—
1,150
20,544
567
1,167
21,094
22,261
2,911
19,350
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone West
Topeka
KS
—
1,230
28,379
1,209
1,230
29,588
30,818
4,295
26,523
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Highland Crossing
Covington
KY
11,062
1,677
14,393
905
1,687
15,288
16,975
2,526
14,449
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Summit Hills
Crestview Hills
KY
6,081
1,780
15,769
614
1,784
16,379
18,163
2,352
15,811
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Elizabethtown
Elizabethtown
KY
—
850
12,510
364
869
12,855
13,724
1,733
11,991
1996
2011
35 years
Atria St. Matthews
Louisville
KY
7,324
939
9,274
512
941
9,784
10,725
1,874
8,851
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stony Brook
Louisville
KY
—
1,860
17,561
403
1,888
17,936
19,824
2,540
17,284
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Springdale
Louisville
KY
—
1,410
16,702
582
1,410
17,284
18,694
2,436
16,258
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Marland Place
Andover
MA
—
1,831
34,592
12,635
1,834
47,224
49,058
4,483
44,575
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Longmeadow Place
Burlington
MA
—
5,310
58,021
878
5,310
58,899
64,209
6,994
57,215
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Fairhaven (Alden)
Fairhaven
MA
—
1,100
16,093
511
1,100
16,604
17,704
2,127
15,577
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbriar Place
Falmouth
MA
30,000
4,630
—
32,630
6,433
30,827
37,260
1,983
35,277
2013
2011
CIP
Atria Woodbriar
Falmouth
MA
—
1,970
43,693
6,422
1,974
50,111
52,085
5,203
46,882
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Draper Place
Hopedale
MA
—
1,140
17,794
968
1,154
18,748
19,902
2,416
17,486
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Merrimack Place
Newburyport
MA
—
2,774
40,645
931
2,801
41,549
44,350
4,933
39,417
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Marina Place
Quincy
MA
—
2,590
33,899
1,002
2,606
34,885
37,491
4,494
32,997
1999
2011
35 years
Riverheights Terrace
Brandon
MB
10,716
799
27,708
—
799
27,708
28,507
351
28,156
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Meadow
Winnipeg
MB
—
3,047
17,821
—
3,047
17,821
20,868
260
20,608
2000
2014
35 years
The Westhaven
Winnipeg
MB
—
871
23,162
—
871
23,162
24,033
302
23,731
1988
2014
35 years
Atria Manresa
Annapolis
MD
—
4,193
19,000
1,123
4,449
19,867
24,316
2,638
21,678
1920
2011
35 years
Atria Salisbury
Salisbury
MD
—
1,940
24,500
306
1,940
24,806
26,746
3,055
23,691
1995
2011
35 years
Atria Kennebunk
Kennebunk
ME
—
1,090
23,496
586
1,096
24,076
25,172
3,161
22,011
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Ann Arbor
Ann Arbor
MI
—
1,703
15,857
1,486
1,674
17,372
19,046
4,297
14,749
2001
2007
35 years
Atria Kinghaven
Riverview
MI
13,781
1,440
26,260
886
1,496
27,090
28,586
3,833
24,753
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Shorehaven
Sterling Heights
MI
—
—
8
610
—
618
618
90
528
1989
2012
35 years
Ste. Anne’s Court
Fredericton
NB
—
1,221
29,626
—
1,221
29,626
30,847
369
30,478
2002
2014
35 years
Chateau De Champlain
St. John
NB
10,065
796
24,577
—
796
24,577
25,373
320
25,053
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Merrywood
Charlotte
NC
—
1,678
36,892
1,653
1,678
38,545
40,223
5,397
34,826
1991
2011
35 years
Atria Southpoint
Durham
NC
16,936
2,130
25,920
87
2,130
26,007
28,137
1,531
26,606
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Oakridge
Raleigh
NC
15,708
1,482
28,838
139
1,512
28,947
30,459
1,713
28,746
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Cranford
Cranford
NJ
26,511
8,260
61,411
2,586
8,313
63,944
72,257
8,225
64,032
1993
2011
35 years
Atria Tinton Falls
Tinton Falls
NJ
—
6,580
13,258
845
6,593
14,090
20,683
2,377
18,306
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
Atria Vista del Rio
Albuquerque
NM
—
—
36
641
27
650
677
102
575
1997
2012
35 years
Atria Sunlake
Las Vegas
NV
—
7
732
463
7
1,195
1,202
676
526
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sutton
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
863
707
35
1,535
1,570
824
746
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Seville
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
796
632
11
1,417
1,428
727
701
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Summit Ridge
Reno
NV
—
4
407
249
4
656
660
377
283
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Shaker
Albany
NY
12,103
1,520
29,667
653
1,626
30,214
31,840
3,919
27,921
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Crossgate
Albany
NY
—
1,080
20,599
402
1,080
21,001
22,081
2,840
19,241
1980
2011
35 years
Atria Woodlands
Ardsley
NY
46,880
7,660
65,581
1,208
7,682
66,767
74,449
8,346
66,103
2005
2011
35 years
Atria Bay Shore
Bay Shore
NY
15,275
4,440
31,983
919
4,448
32,894
37,342
4,263
33,079
1900
2011
35 years
Atria Briarcliff Manor
Briarcliff Manor
NY
—
6,560
33,885
1,396
6,585
35,256
41,841
4,638
37,203
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Riverdale
Bronx
NY
21,612
1,020
24,149
6,664
1,035
30,798
31,833
3,733
28,100
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Delmar Place
Delmar
NY
—
1,201
24,850
242
1,204
25,089
26,293
869
25,424
2004
2013
35 years
Atria East Northport
East Northport
NY
—
9,960
34,467
10,973
9,960
45,440
55,400
4,715
50,685
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Glen Cove
Glen Cove
NY
—
2,035
25,190
759
2,049
25,935
27,984
6,450
21,534
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Great Neck
Great Neck
NY
—
3,390
54,051
1,033
3,390
55,084
58,474
6,521
51,953
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cutter Mill
Great Neck
NY
34,937
2,750
47,919
1,411
2,756
49,324
52,080
6,022
46,058
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Huntington
Huntington Station
NY
—
8,190
1,169
1,342
8,207
2,494
10,701
1,012
9,689
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Hertlin House
Lake Ronkonkoma
NY
—
7,886
16,391
770
7,886
17,161
25,047
1,312
23,735
2002
2012
35 years
Atria Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
3,145
5,489
533
3,147
6,020
9,167
1,308
7,859
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Tanglewood
Lynbrook
NY
25,670
4,120
37,348
380
4,142
37,706
41,848
4,626
37,222
2005
2011
35 years
Atria 86th Street
New York
NY
—
80
73,685
3,903
167
77,501
77,668
9,878
67,790
1998
2011
35 years
Atria on the Hudson
Ossining
NY
—
8,123
63,089
2,285
8,141
65,356
73,497
8,733
64,764
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Penfield
Penfield
NY
—
620
22,036
417
622
22,451
23,073
2,977
20,096
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Plainview
Plainview
NY
13,430
2,480
16,060
820
2,630
16,730
19,360
2,361
16,999
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Rye Brook
Port Chester
NY
43,757
9,660
74,936
788
9,682
75,702
85,384
9,287
76,097
2004
2011
35 years
Atria Kew Gardens
Queens
NY
27,855
3,051
66,013
2,728
3,051
68,741
71,792
8,001
63,791
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Hills
Queens
NY
—
2,050
16,680
494
2,050
17,174
19,224
2,376
16,848
2001
2011
35 years
Atria Greece
Rochester
NY
—
410
14,967
723
610
15,490
16,100
2,109
13,991
1970
2011
35 years
Atria on Roslyn Harbor
Roslyn
NY
65,000
12,909
72,720
987
12,965
73,651
86,616
8,879
77,737
2006
2011
35 years
Atria Guilderland
Slingerlands
NY
—
1,170
22,414
277
1,171
22,690
23,861
2,917
20,944
1950
2011
35 years
Atria South Setauket
South Setauket
NY
—
8,450
14,534
785
8,776
14,993
23,769
3,016
20,753
1967
2011
35 years
Atria Northgate Park
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
—
335
—
335
335
81
254
1985
2012
35 years
The Court at Brooklin
Brooklin
ON
—
2,515
35,602
—
2,515
35,602
38,117
424
37,693
2004
2014
35 years
Burlington Gardens
Burlington
ON
—
7,560
50,744
—
7,560
50,744
58,304
583
57,721
2008
2014
35 years
The Court at Rushdale
Hamilton
ON
15,881
1,799
34,633
—
1,799
34,633
36,432
415
36,017
2004
2014
35 years
Kingsdale Chateau
Kingston
ON
16,640
2,221
36,272
—
2,221
36,272
38,493
435
38,058
2000
2014
35 years
Crystal View Lodge
Nepean
ON
—
1,587
37,243
—
1,587
37,243
38,830
443
38,387
2000
2014
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
The Court at Barrhaven
Nepean
ON
—
1,778
33,922
—
1,778
33,922
35,700
409
35,291
2004
2014
35 years
Stamford Estates
Niagara Falls
ON
12,922
1,414
29,439
—
1,414
29,439
30,853
362
30,491
2005
2014
35 years
Sherbrooke Heights
Peterborough
ON
15,922
2,485
33,747
—
2,485
33,747
36,232
410
35,822
2001
2014
35 years
Anchor Pointe
St. Catharines
ON
15,034
8,214
24,056
—
8,214
24,056
32,270
332
31,938
2000
2014
35 years
The Court at Pringle Creek
Whitby
ON
—
2,965
39,206
—
2,965
39,206
42,171
472
41,699
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Bethlehem
Bethlehem
PA
—
2,479
22,870
360
2,479
23,230
25,709
3,300
22,409
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Center City
Philadelphia
PA
23,234
3,460
18,291
1,561
3,460
19,852
23,312
2,975
20,337
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbridge Place
Phoenixville
PA
—
1,510
19,130
387
1,510
19,517
21,027
2,695
18,332
1996
2011
35 years
Atria South Hills
Pittsburgh
PA
—
880
10,884
283
895
11,152
12,047
1,820
10,227
1998
2011
35 years
La Residence Steger
Saint-Laurent
QC
6,355
1,995
10,926
—
1,995
10,926
12,921
178
12,743
1999
2014
35 years
Primrose Chateau
Saskatoon
QC
15,845
2,611
32,729
—
2,611
32,729
35,340
396
34,944
1996
2014
35 years
Atria Bay Spring Village
Barrington
RI
—
2,000
33,400
1,821
2,074
35,147
37,221
5,047
32,174
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Harborhill Place
East Greenwich
RI
—
2,089
21,702
651
2,113
22,329
24,442
2,921
21,521
1835
2011
35 years
Atria Lincoln Place
Lincoln
RI
—
1,440
12,686
465
1,464
13,127
14,591
2,034
12,557
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Aquidneck Place
Portsmouth
RI
—
2,810
31,623
402
2,810
32,025
34,835
3,825
31,010
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Lake
Columbia
SC
—
670
13,946
488
680
14,424
15,104
1,887
13,217
1999
2011
35 years
Mulberry Estates
Moose Jaw
SK
15,909
2,173
31,791
—
2,173
31,791
33,964
391
33,573
2003
2014
35 years
Queen Victoria
Regina
SK
—
3,018
34,109
—
3,018
34,109
37,127
409
36,718
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Weston Place
Knoxville
TN
9,703
793
7,961
811
967
8,598
9,565
1,374
8,191
1993
2011
35 years
Atria Village at Arboretum
Austin
TX
—
8,280
61,764
289
8,292
62,041
70,333
4,573
65,760
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Collier Park
Beaumont
TX
—
—
—
520
2
518
520
133
387
1996
2012
35 years
Atria Carrollton
Carrollton
TX
7,189
360
20,465
815
364
21,276
21,640
2,824
18,816
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Grapevine
Grapevine
TX
—
2,070
23,104
254
2,070
23,358
25,428
3,055
22,373
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Westchase
Houston
TX
—
2,318
22,278
401
2,318
22,679
24,997
3,043
21,954
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Kingwood
Kingwood
TX
—
1,170
4,518
334
1,179
4,843
6,022
886
5,136
1998
2011
35 years
Atria at Hometown
North Richland Hills
TX
—
1,932
30,382
343
1,955
30,702
32,657
1,835
30,822
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Canyon Creek
Plano
TX
—
3,110
45,999
304
3,125
46,288
49,413
2,718
46,695
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Richardson
Richardson
TX
—
1,590
23,662
505
1,590
24,167
25,757
3,127
22,630
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cypresswood
Spring
TX
9,175
880
9,192
336
880
9,528
10,408
1,371
9,037
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Sugar Land
Sugar Land
TX
—
970
17,542
532
971
18,073
19,044
2,359
16,685
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Copeland
Tyler
TX
9,945
1,879
17,901
410
1,881
18,309
20,190
2,520
17,670
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Park
Tyler
TX
—
920
31,271
532
927
31,796
32,723
4,430
28,293
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Sandy
Sandy
UT
—
3,356
18,805
1,453
3,499
20,115
23,614
3,245
20,369
1986
2011
35 years
Atria Virginia Beach (Hilltop)
Virginia Beach
VA
—
1,749
33,004
411
1,749
33,415
35,164
4,446
30,718
1998
2011
35 years
Other Projects
—
—
1,938
—
—
1,938
1,938
—
1,938
CIP
CIP
CIP
TOTAL FOR ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
959,138
520,385
4,710,535
233,570
527,898
4,936,592
5,464,490
498,245
4,966,245
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
OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Elmcroft of Grayson Valley
Birmingham
AL
—
1,040
19,145
474
1,046
19,613
20,659
2,237
18,422
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Byrd Springs
Hunstville
AL
—
1,720
11,270
440
1,723
11,707
13,430
1,460
11,970
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Heritage Woods
Mobile
AL
—
1,020
10,241
458
1,020
10,699
11,719
1,349
10,370
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Halcyon
Montgomery
AL
—
220
5,476
—
220
5,476
5,696
1,278
4,418
1999
2006
35 years
Rosewood Manor (AL)
Scottsboro
AL
—
680
4,038
—
680
4,038
4,718
469
4,249
1998
2011
35 years
West Shores
Hot Springs
AR
—
1,326
10,904
—
1,326
10,904
12,230
3,009
9,221
1988
2005
35 years
Elmcroft of Maumelle
Maumelle
AR
—
1,252
7,601
—
1,252
7,601
8,853
1,774
7,079
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Mountain Home
Mountain Home
AR
—
204
8,971
—
204
8,971
9,175
2,093
7,082
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sherwood
Sherwood
AR
—
1,320
5,693
—
1,320
5,693
7,013
1,328
5,685
1997
2006
35 years
Chandler Memory Care Community
Chandler
AZ
—
2,910
—
9,066
3,094
8,882
11,976
977
10,999
2011
2011
35 years
Cottonwood Village
Cottonwood
AZ
—
1,200
15,124
—
1,200
15,124
16,324
4,144
12,180
1986
2005
35 years
Silver Creek Inn Memory Care Community
Gilbert
AZ
—
890
5,918
—
890
5,918
6,808
532
6,276
2012
2012
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Green Valley
Green Valley
AZ
—
1,227
13,977
—
1,227
13,977
15,204
39
15,165
1998
2014
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lake Havasu City
Lake Havasu
AZ
—
594
14,792
—
594
14,792
15,386
41
15,345
1999
2014
35 years
Arbor Rose
Mesa
AZ
—
1,100
11,880
2,434
1,100
14,314
15,414
2,179
13,235
1999
2011
35 years
The Stratford
Phoenix
AZ
—
1,931
33,576
—
1,931
33,576
35,507
93
35,414
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Creek Inn Memory Care
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,310
6,322
(5,365
)
2,040
1,227
3,267
—
3,267
1986
2011
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Sierra Vista
Sierra Vista
AZ
—
295
13,224
—
295
13,224
13,519
37
13,482
1999
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
1,090
12,942
734
1,090
13,676
14,766
1,623
13,143
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of River Centre
Tucson
AZ
—
1,940
5,195
405
1,940
5,600
7,540
806
6,734
1999
2011
35 years
Sierra Ridge Memory Care
Auburn
CA
—
681
6,071
—
681
6,071
6,752
49
6,703
2011
2014
35 years
Careage Banning
Banning
CA
—
2,970
16,037
—
2,970
16,037
19,007
1,982
17,025
2004
2011
35 years
Las Villas Del Carlsbad
Carlsbad
CA
—
1,760
30,469
—
1,760
30,469
32,229
7,110
25,119
1987
2006
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Chico
Chico
CA
—
1,069
14,929
—
1,069
14,929
15,998
42
15,956
1998
2014
35 years
Villa Bonita
Chula Vista
CA
—
1,610
9,169
—
1,610
9,169
10,779
1,202
9,577
1989
2011
35 years
The Meadows Senior Living
Elk Grove
CA
—
1,308
19,667
—
1,308
19,667
20,975
157
20,818
2003
2014
35 years
Las Villas Del Norte
Escondido
CA
—
2,791
32,632
—
2,791
32,632
35,423
7,614
27,809
1986
2006
35 years
Alder Bay Assisted Living
Eureka
CA
—
1,170
5,228
(70
)
1,170
5,158
6,328
670
5,658
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of La Mesa
La Mesa
CA
—
2,431
6,101
—
2,431
6,101
8,532
1,424
7,108
1997
2006
35 years
Grossmont Gardens
La Mesa
CA
—
9,104
59,349
—
9,104
59,349
68,453
13,848
54,605
1964
2006
35 years
Palms, The
La Mirada
CA
—
2,700
43,919
—
2,700
43,919
46,619
1,836
44,783
1990
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lancaster
Lancaster
CA
—
718
10,459
—
718
10,459
11,177
29
11,148
1999
2014
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
Prestige Assisted Living at Marysville
Marysville
CA
—
741
7,467
—
741
7,467
8,208
21
8,187
1999
2014
35 years
Mountview Retirement Residence
Montrose
CA
—
1,089
15,449
—
1,089
15,449
16,538
3,605
12,933
1974
2006
35 years
Redwood Retirement
Napa
CA
—
2,798
12,639
—
2,798
12,639
15,437
540
14,897
1986
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Oroville
Oroville
CA
—
638
8,079
—
638
8,079
8,717
23
8,694
1999
2014
35 years
Villa de Palma
Placentia
CA
—
1,260
10,174
—
1,260
10,174
11,434
1,290
10,144
1982
2011
35 years
Valencia Commons
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
1,439
36,363
—
1,439
36,363
37,802
1,516
36,286
2002
2013
35 years
Mission Hills
Rancho Mirage
CA
—
6,800
3,637
—
6,800
3,637
10,437
752
9,685
1999
2011
35 years
Shasta Estates
Redding
CA
—
1,180
23,463
—
1,180
23,463
24,643
979
23,664
2009
2013
35 years
The Vistas
Redding
CA
—
1,290
22,033
—
1,290
22,033
23,323
2,487
20,836
2007
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Point Loma
San Diego
CA
—
2,117
6,865
—
2,117
6,865
8,982
1,602
7,380
1999
2006
35 years
Regency of Evergreen Valley
San Jose
CA
—
2,700
7,994
—
2,700
7,994
10,694
1,229
9,465
1998
2011
35 years
Villa del Obispo
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
2,660
9,560
—
2,660
9,560
12,220
1,191
11,029
1985
2011
35 years
Villa Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara
CA
—
1,219
12,426
—
1,219
12,426
13,645
3,419
10,226
1977
2005
35 years
Skyline Place Senior Living
Sonora
CA
—
1,815
28,472
—
1,815
28,472
30,287
229
30,058
1996
2014
35 years
Oak Terrace Memory Care
Soulsbyville
CA
—
1,146
5,275
—
1,146
5,275
6,421
44
6,377
1999
2014
35 years
Eagle Lake Village
Susanville
CA
—
1,165
6,719
—
1,165
6,719
7,884
551
7,333
2006
2012
35 years
Bonaventure, The
Ventura
CA
—
5,294
32,747
—
5,294
32,747
38,041
1,388
36,653
2005
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Visalia
Visalia
CA
—
1,300
8,378
—
1,300
8,378
9,678
24
9,654
1998
2014
35 years
Vista Village
Vista
CA
—
1,630
5,640
61
1,630
5,701
7,331
816
6,515
1980
2011
35 years
Rancho Vista
Vista
CA
—
6,730
21,828
—
6,730
21,828
28,558
5,093
23,465
1982
2006
35 years
Westminster Terrace
Westminster
CA
—
1,700
11,514
—
1,700
11,514
13,214
1,321
11,893
2001
2011
35 years
Highland Trail
Broomfield
CO
—
2,511
26,431
—
2,511
26,431
28,942
1,110
27,832
2009
2013
35 years
Caley Ridge
Englewood
CO
—
1,157
13,133
—
1,157
13,133
14,290
1,077
13,213
1999
2012
35 years
Garden Square at Westlake
Greeley
CO
—
630
8,211
—
630
8,211
8,841
979
7,862
1998
2011
35 years
Garden Square of Greeley
Greeley
CO
—
330
2,735
—
330
2,735
3,065
339
2,726
1995
2011
35 years
Lakewood Estates
Lakewood
CO
—
1,306
21,137
—
1,306
21,137
22,443
884
21,559
1988
2013
35 years
Sugar Valley Estates
Loveland
CO
—
1,255
21,837
—
1,255
21,837
23,092
913
22,179
2009
2013
35 years
Devonshire Acres
Sterling
CO
—
950
13,569
(3,501
)
950
10,068
11,018
1,229
9,789
1979
2011
35 years
Gardenside Terrace
Branford
CT
—
7,000
31,518
—
7,000
31,518
38,518
3,561
34,957
1999
2011
35 years
Hearth at Tuxis Pond
Madison
CT
—
1,610
44,322
—
1,610
44,322
45,932
4,763
41,169
2002
2011
35 years
White Oaks
Manchester
CT
—
2,584
34,507
—
2,584
34,507
37,091
1,445
35,646
2007
2013
35 years
Hampton Manor Belleview
Belleview
FL
—
390
8,337
—
390
8,337
8,727
990
7,737
1988
2011
35 years
Sabal House
Cantonment
FL
—
430
5,902
—
430
5,902
6,332
682
5,650
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Coral Springs
Coral Springs
FL
—
3,280
11,877
—
3,280
11,877
15,157
1,455
13,702
1999
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
Stanley House
Defuniak Springs
FL
—
410
5,659
—
410
5,659
6,069
654
5,415
1999
2011
35 years
The Peninsula
Hollywood
FL
—
3,660
9,122
—
3,660
9,122
12,782
1,294
11,488
1972
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Timberlin Parc
Jacksonville
FL
—
455
5,905
—
455
5,905
6,360
1,378
4,982
1998
2006
35 years
Forsyth House
Milton
FL
—
610
6,503
—
610
6,503
7,113
742
6,371
1999
2011
35 years
The Carlisle Naples
Naples
FL
—
8,406
78,091
—
8,406
78,091
86,497
8,393
78,104
N/A
2011
35 years
Naples ALZ Development
Naples
FL
—
2,983
—
—
2,983
—
2,983
—
2,983
CIP
2014
CIP
Hampton Manor at 24th Road
Ocala
FL
—
690
8,767
—
690
8,767
9,457
1,002
8,455
1996
2011
35 years
Hampton Manor at Deerwood
Ocala
FL
—
790
5,605
—
790
5,605
6,395
717
5,678
2005
2011
35 years
Las Palmas
Palm Coast
FL
—
984
30,009
—
984
30,009
30,993
1,250
29,743
2009
2013
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
2,230
2,362
—
2,230
2,362
4,592
451
4,141
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia House
Quincy
FL
—
400
5,190
—
400
5,190
5,590
611
4,979
1999
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Tallahassee
Tallahassee
FL
—
2,430
17,745
—
2,430
17,745
20,175
2,133
18,042
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia Place
Tallahassee
FL
—
640
8,013
—
640
8,013
8,653
897
7,756
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Tamarac
Tamarac
FL
—
3,920
14,130
—
3,920
14,130
18,050
1,674
16,376
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Carrolwood
Tampa
FL
—
5,410
20,944
601
5,410
21,545
26,955
2,513
24,442
2001
2011
35 years
Augusta Gardens
Augusta
GA
—
530
10,262
—
530
10,262
10,792
1,201
9,591
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Mt. Zion
Jonesboro
GA
—
1,140
15,447
(16,587
)
—
—
—
—
—
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Milford Chase
Marietta
GA
—
3,350
7,431
(10,781
)
—
—
—
—
—
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinez
Martinez
GA
—
408
6,764
—
408
6,764
7,172
1,449
5,723
1997
2007
35 years
Elmcroft of Roswell
Roswell
GA
—
1,867
15,835
—
1,867
15,835
17,702
—
17,702
1997
2014
35 years
Crownpointe of Carmel
Carmel
IN
—
1,110
1,933
—
1,110
1,933
3,043
324
2,719
1998
2011
35 years
Azalea Hills
Floyds Knobs
IN
—
2,370
8,708
—
2,370
8,708
11,078
1,035
10,043
2008
2011
35 years
Georgetowne Place
Fort Wayne
IN
—
1,315
18,185
—
1,315
18,185
19,500
4,853
14,647
1987
2005
35 years
Crown Pointe Senior Living Community
Greensburg
IN
—
420
1,764
—
420
1,764
2,184
263
1,921
1999
2011
35 years
Summit West
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,240
7,922
—
1,240
7,922
9,162
992
8,170
1998
2011
35 years
The Harrison
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,200
5,740
—
1,200
5,740
6,940
1,664
5,276
1985
2005
35 years
Lakeview Commons Assisted Living
Monticello
IN
—
250
5,263
—
250
5,263
5,513
588
4,925
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Muncie
Muncie
IN
—
244
11,218
—
244
11,218
11,462
2,404
9,058
1998
2007
35 years
Wood Ridge
South Bend
IN
—
590
4,850
(35
)
590
4,815
5,405
598
4,807
1990
2011
35 years
Drury Place at Alvamar
Lawrence
KS
—
1,700
9,156
40
1,700
9,196
10,896
1,112
9,784
1995
2011
35 years
Drury Place at Salina
Salina
KS
—
1,300
1,738
26
1,302
1,762
3,064
348
2,716
1989
2011
35 years
Drury Place Retirement Apartments
Topeka
KS
—
390
6,217
29
390
6,246
6,636
743
5,893
1986
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Florence
Florence
KY
—
1,535
21,826
—
1,535
21,826
23,361
—
23,361
2010
2014
35 years
Hartland Hills
Lexington
KY
—
1,468
23,929
—
1,468
23,929
25,397
1,000
24,397
2001
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Mount Washington
Mount Washington
KY
—
758
12,048
—
758
12,048
12,806
—
12,806
2005
2014
35 years
Heritage Woods
Agawam
MA
—
1,249
4,625
—
1,249
4,625
5,874
1,990
3,884
1997
2004
30 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
Wingate at Silver Lake
Kingston
MA
—
3,330
20,624
—
3,330
20,624
23,954
2,622
21,332
1996
2011
35 years
Devonshire Estates
Lenox
MA
—
1,832
31,124
—
1,832
31,124
32,956
1,301
31,655
1998
2013
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Hagerstown
Hagerstown
MD
—
2,010
1,293
—
2,010
1,293
3,303
316
2,987
1999
2011
35 years
Clover Healthcare
Auburn
ME
—
1,400
26,895
—
1,400
26,895
28,295
3,238
25,057
1982
2011
35 years
Gorham House
Gorham
ME
—
1,360
33,147
1,472
1,527
34,452
35,979
3,648
32,331
1990
2011
35 years
Kittery Estates
Kittery
ME
—
1,531
30,811
—
1,531
30,811
32,342
1,286
31,056
2009
2013
35 years
Woods at Canco
Portland
ME
—
1,441
45,578
—
1,441
45,578
47,019
1,898
45,121
2000
2013
35 years
Sentry Hill
York Harbor
ME
—
3,490
19,869
—
3,490
19,869
23,359
2,232
21,127
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Downriver
Brownstown Charter Township
MI
—
320
32,652
415
371
33,016
33,387
3,596
29,791
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of East Lansing
East Lansing
MI
7,025
1,956
18,122
—
1,956
18,122
20,078
1,393
18,685
1989
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Kentwood
Kentwood
MI
—
510
13,976
499
510
14,475
14,985
1,804
13,181
2001
2011
35 years
Primrose Austin
Austin
MN
—
2,540
11,707
—
2,540
11,707
14,247
1,284
12,963
2002
2011
35 years
Primrose Duluth
Duluth
MN
—
6,190
8,296
—
6,190
8,296
14,486
1,045
13,441
2003
2011
35 years
Primrose Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
1,860
8,920
—
1,860
8,920
10,780
1,070
9,710
1999
2011
35 years
Rose Arbor
Maple Grove
MN
—
1,140
12,421
—
1,140
12,421
13,561
4,571
8,990
2000
2006
35 years
Wildflower Lodge
Maple Grove
MN
—
504
5,035
—
504
5,035
5,539
1,858
3,681
1981
2006
35 years
Lodge at White Bear
White Bear Lake
MN
—
732
24,999
—
732
24,999
25,731
1,041
24,690
2002
2013
35 years
Canyon Creek Inn Memory Care
Billings
MT
—
420
11,217
7
420
11,224
11,644
1,172
10,472
2011
2011
35 years
Springs at Missoula
Missoula
MT
16,318
1,975
34,390
—
1,975
34,390
36,365
2,546
33,819
2004
2012
35 years
Carillon ALF of Asheboro
Asheboro
NC
—
680
15,370
—
680
15,370
16,050
1,713
14,337
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Little Avenue
Charlotte
NC
—
250
5,077
—
250
5,077
5,327
1,185
4,142
1997
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Cramer Mountain
Cramerton
NC
—
530
18,225
—
530
18,225
18,755
2,050
16,705
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Harrisburg
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,660
15,130
—
1,660
15,130
16,790
1,692
15,098
1997
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
NC
—
2,210
7,372
—
2,210
7,372
9,582
937
8,645
2005
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hillsborough
Hillsborough
NC
—
1,450
19,754
—
1,450
19,754
21,204
2,172
19,032
2005
2011
35 years
Willow Grove
Matthews
NC
—
763
27,544
—
763
27,544
28,307
1,146
27,161
2009
2013
35 years
Carillon ALF of Newton
Newton
NC
—
540
14,935
—
540
14,935
15,475
1,665
13,810
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of Olde Raleigh
Raleigh
NC
9,757
1,989
18,648
—
1,989
18,648
20,637
1,464
19,173
1991
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Northridge
Raleigh
NC
—
184
3,592
—
184
3,592
3,776
838
2,938
1984
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Salisbury
Salisbury
NC
—
1,580
25,026
—
1,580
25,026
26,606
2,730
23,876
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Shelby
Shelby
NC
—
660
15,471
—
660
15,471
16,131
1,730
14,401
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Southern Pines
Southern Pines
NC
—
1,196
10,766
—
1,196
10,766
11,962
1,461
10,501
1998
2010
35 years
Carillon ALF of Southport
Southport
NC
—
1,330
10,356
—
1,330
10,356
11,686
1,236
10,450
2005
2011
35 years
Primrose Bismarck
Bismarck
ND
—
1,210
9,768
—
1,210
9,768
10,978
1,108
9,870
1994
2011
35 years
Crown Pointe
Omaha
NE
—
1,316
11,950
—
1,316
11,950
13,266
3,311
9,955
1985
2005
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
Birch Heights
Derry
NH
—
1,413
30,267
—
1,413
30,267
31,680
1,263
30,417
2009
2013
35 years
Brandywine at Brick
Brick
NJ
—
1,490
16,747
—
1,490
16,747
18,237
3,996
14,241
1999
2011
35 years
Bear Canyon Estates
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,879
36,223
—
1,879
36,223
38,102
1,512
36,590
1997
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Quintessence
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,150
26,527
406
1,165
26,918
28,083
2,941
25,142
1998
2011
35 years
The Amberleigh
Buffalo
NY
—
3,498
19,097
—
3,498
19,097
22,595
5,471
17,124
1988
2005
35 years
Castle Gardens
Vestal
NY
—
1,830
20,312
2,230
1,885
22,487
24,372
2,912
21,460
1994
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Lima
Lima
OH
—
490
3,368
—
490
3,368
3,858
786
3,072
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Ontario
Mansfield
OH
—
523
7,968
—
523
7,968
8,491
1,859
6,632
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Medina
Medina
OH
—
661
9,788
—
661
9,788
10,449
2,284
8,165
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Washington Township
Miamisburg
OH
—
1,235
12,611
—
1,235
12,611
13,846
2,943
10,903
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sagamore Hills
Northfield
OH
—
980
12,604
—
980
12,604
13,584
2,941
10,643
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lorain
Vermilion
OH
—
500
15,461
499
557
15,903
16,460
1,902
14,558
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Xenia
Xenia
OH
—
653
2,801
—
653
2,801
3,454
654
2,800
1999
2006
35 years
Arbor House of Mustang
Mustang
OK
—
372
3,587
—
372
3,587
3,959
240
3,719
1999
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Norman
Norman
OK
—
444
7,525
—
444
7,525
7,969
501
7,468
2000
2012
35 years
Arbor House Reminisce Center
Norman
OK
—
438
3,028
—
438
3,028
3,466
204
3,262
2004
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Midwest City
Oklahoma City
OK
—
544
9,133
—
544
9,133
9,677
608
9,069
2004
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Quail Springs
Oklahoma City
OK
—
500
16,632
(17,132
)
—
—
—
—
—
1999
2011
35 years
Mansion at Waterford
Oklahoma City
OK
—
2,077
14,184
—
2,077
14,184
16,261
1,164
15,097
1999
2012
35 years
Meadowbrook Place
Baker City
OR
—
1,430
5,311
—
1,430
5,311
6,741
44
6,697
1965
2014
35 years
Edgewood Downs
Beaverton
OR
—
2,356
15,476
—
2,356
15,476
17,832
655
17,177
1977
2013
35 years
Avamere at Hillsboro
Hillsboro
OR
—
4,400
8,353
1,065
4,400
9,418
13,818
1,107
12,711
2000
2011
35 years
The Springs at Tanasbourne
Hillsboro
OR
35,354
4,689
55,035
—
4,689
55,035
59,724
3,431
56,293
2009
2013
35 years
Avamere court at Keizer
Keizer
OR
—
1,260
30,183
—
1,260
30,183
31,443
3,486
27,957
1970
2011
35 years
Keizer River ALZ Facility
Keizer
OR
—
—
—
7,382
922
6,460
7,382
53
7,329
2012
2012
35 years
The Stafford
Lake Oswego
OR
—
1,800
16,122
—
1,800
16,122
17,922
1,926
15,996
2008
2011
35 years
The Pearl at Kruse Way
Lake Oswego
OR
—
2,000
12,880
—
2,000
12,880
14,880
1,500
13,380
2005
2011
35 years
Avamere at Three Fountains
Medford
OR
—
2,340
33,187
—
2,340
33,187
35,527
3,787
31,740
1974
2011
35 years
The Springs at Clackamas Woods (ILF)
Milwaukie
OR
10,731
1,264
22,429
—
1,264
22,429
23,693
1,661
22,032
1999
2012
35 years
Clackamas Woods Assisted Living
Milwaukie
OR
5,741
681
12,077
—
681
12,077
12,758
894
11,864
1999
2012
35 years
Avamere at Newberg
Newberg
OR
—
1,320
4,664
383
1,320
5,047
6,367
654
5,713
1999
2011
35 years
Avamere Living at Berry Park
Oregon City
OR
—
1,910
4,249
2,147
1,910
6,396
8,306
674
7,632
1972
2011
35 years
McLoughlin Place Senior Living
Oregon City
OR
—
2,418
26,819
—
2,418
26,819
29,237
217
29,020
1997
2014
35 years
Avamere at Bethany
Portland
OR
—
3,150
16,740
—
3,150
16,740
19,890
1,973
17,917
2002
2011
35 years
Avamere at Sandy
Sandy
OR
—
1,000
7,309
226
1,000
7,535
8,535
931
7,604
1999
2011
35 years
Suzanne Elise ALF
Seaside
OR
—
1,940
4,027
—
1,940
4,027
5,967
652
5,315
1998
2011
35 years
Avamere at Sherwood
Sherwood
OR
—
1,010
7,051
203
1,010
7,254
8,264
906
7,358
2000
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
Chateau Gardens
Springfield
OR
—
1,550
4,197
—
1,550
4,197
5,747
483
5,264
1991
2011
35 years
Avamere at St Helens
St. Helens
OR
—
1,410
10,496
378
1,410
10,874
12,284
1,256
11,028
2000
2011
35 years
Flagstone Senior Living
The Dalles
OR
—
1,631
17,786
—
1,631
17,786
19,417
144
19,273
1991
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Allison Park
Allison Park
PA
—
1,171
5,686
—
1,171
5,686
6,857
1,327
5,530
1986
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Chippewa
Beaver Falls
PA
—
1,394
8,586
—
1,394
8,586
9,980
2,003
7,977
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Berwick
Berwick
PA
—
111
6,741
—
111
6,741
6,852
1,573
5,279
1998
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Lakemont
Bridgeville
PA
—
1,660
12,624
—
1,660
12,624
14,284
1,552
12,732
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Dillsburg
Dillsburg
PA
—
432
7,797
—
432
7,797
8,229
1,819
6,410
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Altoona
Hollidaysburg
PA
—
331
4,729
—
331
4,729
5,060
1,104
3,956
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
PA
—
240
7,336
—
240
7,336
7,576
1,712
5,864
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lewisburg
Lewisburg
PA
—
232
5,666
—
232
5,666
5,898
1,322
4,576
1999
2006
35 years
Lehigh Commons
Macungie
PA
—
420
4,406
450
420
4,856
5,276
1,917
3,359
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Loyalsock
Montoursville
PA
—
413
3,412
—
413
3,412
3,825
796
3,029
1999
2006
35 years
Highgate at Paoli Pointe
Paoli
PA
—
1,151
9,079
—
1,151
9,079
10,230
3,461
6,769
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Mid Valley
Peckville
PA
—
619
11,662
—
619
11,662
12,281
—
12,281
1998
2014
35 years
Sanatoga Court
Pottstown
PA
—
360
3,233
—
360
3,233
3,593
1,300
2,293
1997
2004
30 years
Berkshire Commons
Reading
PA
—
470
4,301
—
470
4,301
4,771
1,727
3,044
1997
2004
30 years
Mifflin Court
Reading
PA
—
689
4,265
351
689
4,616
5,305
1,568
3,737
1997
2004
35 years
Elmcroft of Reading
Reading
PA
—
638
4,942
—
638
4,942
5,580
1,153
4,427
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Reedsville
Reedsville
PA
—
189
5,170
—
189
5,170
5,359
1,206
4,153
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Saxonburg
Saxonburg
PA
—
770
5,949
—
770
5,949
6,719
1,388
5,331
1994
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shippensburg
Shippensburg
PA
—
203
7,634
—
203
7,634
7,837
1,781
6,056
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of State College
State College
PA
—
320
7,407
—
320
7,407
7,727
1,728
5,999
1997
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at York
York
PA
—
1,260
6,923
—
1,260
6,923
8,183
849
7,334
1999
2011
35 years
Forest Pines
Columbia
SC
—
1,058
27,471
—
1,058
27,471
28,529
1,145
27,384
1997
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Florence SC
Florence
SC
—
108
7,620
—
108
7,620
7,728
1,778
5,950
1998
2006
35 years
Primrose Aberdeen
Aberdeen
SD
—
850
659
—
850
659
1,509
179
1,330
1991
2011
35 years
Primrose Place
Aberdeen
SD
—
310
3,242
—
310
3,242
3,552
385
3,167
2000
2011
35 years
Primrose Rapid City
Rapid City
SD
—
860
8,722
—
860
8,722
9,582
1,028
8,554
1997
2011
35 years
Primrose Sioux Falls
Sioux Falls
SD
—
2,180
12,936
—
2,180
12,936
15,116
1,544
13,572
2002
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe of Bristol
Bristol
TN
—
470
16,006
—
470
16,006
16,476
1,769
14,707
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hamilton Place
Chattanooga
TN
—
87
4,248
—
87
4,248
4,335
991
3,344
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shallowford
Chattanooga
TN
—
580
7,568
455
582
8,021
8,603
1,097
7,506
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
TN
—
600
5,304
—
600
5,304
5,904
—
5,904
1999
2014
35 years
Regency House
Hixson
TN
—
140
6,611
—
140
6,611
6,751
764
5,987
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Jackson
Jackson
TN
—
768
16,840
—
768
16,840
17,608
—
17,608
1998
2014
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Johnson City
Johnson City
TN
—
590
10,043
—
590
10,043
10,633
1,145
9,488
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Kingsport
Kingsport
TN
—
22
7,815
—
22
7,815
7,837
1,823
6,014
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Halls
Knoxville
TN
—
387
4,948
—
387
4,948
5,335
—
5,335
1998
2014
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
Elmcroft of West Knoxville
Knoxville
TN
—
439
10,697
—
439
10,697
11,136
2,496
8,640
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
TN
—
180
7,086
—
180
7,086
7,266
1,653
5,613
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Twin Hills
Madison
TN
—
860
8,208
(9,068
)
—
—
—
—
—
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Bartlett
Memphis
TN
—
570
25,552
343
570
25,895
26,465
2,860
23,605
1999
2011
35 years
Kennington Place
Memphis
TN
—
1,820
4,748
761
1,820
5,509
7,329
911
6,418
1989
2011
35 years
Glenmary Senior Manor
Memphis
TN
—
510
5,860
224
510
6,084
6,594
946
5,648
1964
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Murfreesboro
Murfreesboro
TN
—
940
8,030
—
940
8,030
8,970
959
8,011
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Brentwood
Nashville
TN
—
960
22,020
603
960
22,623
23,583
2,610
20,973
1998
2011
35 years
Trenton Health Care Center
Trenton
TN
—
460
6,058
—
460
6,058
6,518
3,560
2,958
1974
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Arlington
Arlington
TX
—
2,650
14,060
473
2,650
14,533
17,183
1,768
15,415
1998
2011
35 years
Meadowbrook ALZ
Arlington
TX
—
755
4,677
940
755
5,617
6,372
374
5,998
2012
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Austin
Austin
TX
—
2,770
25,820
534
2,770
26,354
29,124
2,969
26,155
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Bedford
Bedford
TX
—
770
19,691
493
770
20,184
20,954
2,306
18,648
1999
2011
35 years
Highland Estates
Cedar Park
TX
—
1,679
28,943
—
1,679
28,943
30,622
1,210
29,412
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Rivershire
Conroe
TX
—
860
32,671
689
860
33,360
34,220
3,679
30,541
1997
2011
35 years
Heritage Oaks Retirement Village
Corsicana
TX
—
790
30,636
—
790
30,636
31,426
3,425
28,001
1996
2011
35 years
Flower Mound
Flower Mound
TX
—
900
5,512
—
900
5,512
6,412
646
5,766
1995
2011
35 years
Arbor House Granbury
Granbury
TX
—
390
8,186
—
390
8,186
8,576
544
8,032
2007
2012
35 years
Copperfield Estates
Houston
TX
—
1,216
21,135
—
1,216
21,135
22,351
883
21,468
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Braeswood
Houston
TX
—
3,970
15,919
626
3,970
16,545
20,515
1,979
18,536
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Cy-Fair
Houston
TX
—
1,580
21,801
419
1,593
22,207
23,800
2,501
21,299
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Irving
Irving
TX
—
1,620
18,755
455
1,620
19,210
20,830
2,208
18,622
1999
2011
35 years
Whitley Place
Keller
TX
—
—
5,100
—
—
5,100
5,100
1,008
4,092
1998
2008
35 years
Elmcroft of Lake Jackson
Lake Jackson
TX
—
710
14,765
417
710
15,182
15,892
1,777
14,115
1998
2011
35 years
Arbor House Lewisville
Lewisville
TX
—
824
10,308
—
824
10,308
11,132
688
10,444
2007
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Vista Ridge
Lewisville
TX
—
6,280
10,548
654
6,303
11,179
17,482
1,442
16,040
1998
2011
35 years
Polo Park Estates
Midland
TX
—
765
29,447
—
765
29,447
30,212
1,225
28,987
1996
2013
35 years
Arbor Hills Memory Care Community
Plano
TX
—
—
—
6,733
1,014
5,719
6,733
284
6,449
2013
2011
35 years
Arbor House of Rockwall
Rockwall
TX
—
1,537
12,883
—
1,537
12,883
14,420
864
13,556
2009
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Windcrest
San Antonio
TX
—
920
13,011
526
920
13,537
14,457
1,667
12,790
1999
2011
35 years
Paradise Springs
Spring
TX
—
1,488
24,556
—
1,488
24,556
26,044
1,027
25,017
2007
2013
35 years
Arbor House of Temple
Temple
TX
—
473
6,750
—
473
6,750
7,223
450
6,773
2008
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Cottonwood
Temple
TX
—
630
17,515
405
630
17,920
18,550
2,045
16,505
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Mainland
Texas City
TX
—
520
14,849
504
520
15,353
15,873
1,786
14,087
1996
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Victoria
Victoria
TX
—
440
13,040
425
440
13,465
13,905
1,573
12,332
1997
2011
35 years
Arbor House of Weatherford
Weatherford
TX
—
233
3,347
—
233
3,347
3,580
223
3,357
1994
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Wharton
Wharton
TX
—
320
13,799
658
320
14,457
14,777
1,708
13,069
1996
2011
35 years
Mountain Ridge
South Ogden
UT
11,840
1,243
24,659
—
1,243
24,659
25,902
68
25,834
2001
2014
35 years
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
Elmcroft of Chesterfield
Richmond
VA
—
829
6,534
—
829
6,534
7,363
1,525
5,838
1999
2006
35 years
Pheasant Ridge
Roanoke
VA
—
1,813
9,027
—
1,813
9,027
10,840
741
10,099
1999
2012
35 years
Cascade Valley Senior Living
Arlington
WA
—
1,413
6,294
—
1,413
6,294
7,707
180
7,527
1995
2014
35 years
Cooks Hill Manor
Centralia
WA
—
520
6,144
—
520
6,144
6,664
775
5,889
1993
2011
35 years
The Sequoia
Olympia
WA
—
1,490
13,724
—
1,490
13,724
15,214
1,615
13,599
1995
2011
35 years
Bishop Place Senior Living
Pullman
WA
—
1,780
33,608
—
1,780
33,608
35,388
34
35,354
1998
2014
35 years
Willow Gardens
Puyallup
WA
—
1,959
35,492
—
1,959
35,492
37,451
1,483
35,968
1996
2013
35 years
Birchview
Sedro-Woolley
WA
—
210
14,145
—
210
14,145
14,355
1,522
12,833
1996
2011
35 years
Discovery Memory care
Sequim
WA
—
320
10,544
—
320
10,544
10,864
1,193
9,671
1961
2011
35 years
The Academy Retirement Comm
Spokane
WA
—
650
3,741
—
650
3,741
4,391
571
3,820
1959
2011
35 years
The Village Retirement & Assisted Living
Tacoma
WA
—
2,200
5,938
—
2,200
5,938
8,138
928
7,210
1976
2011
35 years
Matthews of Appleton I
Appleton
WI
—
130
1,834
(41
)
130
1,793
1,923
225
1,698
1996
2011
35 years
Matthews of Appleton II
Appleton
WI
—
140
2,016
(49
)
140
1,967
2,107
245
1,862
1997
2011
35 years
Hunters Ridge
Beaver Dam
WI
—
260
2,380
—
260
2,380
2,640
289
2,351
1998
2011
35 years
Harbor House Beloit
Beloit
WI
—
150
4,356
—
150
4,356
4,506
483
4,023
1990
2011
35 years
Harbor House Clinton
Clinton
WI
—
290
4,390
—
290
4,390
4,680
487
4,193
1991
2011
35 years
Creekside
Cudahy
WI
—
760
1,693
—
760
1,693
2,453
224
2,229
2001
2011
35 years
Harmony of Denmark
Denmark
WI
1,112
220
2,228
—
220
2,228
2,448
274
2,174
1995
2011
35 years
Harbor House Eau Claire
Eau Claire
WI
—
210
6,259
—
210
6,259
6,469
677
5,792
1996
2011
35 years
Chapel Valley
Fitchburg
WI
—
450
2,372
—
450
2,372
2,822
292
2,530
1998
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee II
Fox Point
WI
—
1,810
943
37
1,820
970
2,790
165
2,625
1999
2011
35 years
Harmony of Brenwood Park
Franklin
WI
5,810
1,870
13,804
—
1,870
13,804
15,674
1,498
14,176
2003
2011
35 years
Laurel Oaks
Glendale
WI
—
2,390
43,587
—
2,390
43,587
45,977
4,821
41,156
1988
2011
35 years
Harmony of Green Bay
Green Bay
WI
2,896
640
5,008
—
640
5,008
5,648
587
5,061
1990
2011
35 years
Layton Terrace
Greenfield
WI
7,195
3,490
39,201
—
3,490
39,201
42,691
4,426
38,265
1999
2011
35 years
Matthews of Hartland
Hartland
WI
—
640
1,663
43
652
1,694
2,346
243
2,103
1985
2011
35 years
Matthews of Horicon
Horicon
WI
—
340
3,327
(95
)
345
3,227
3,572
433
3,139
2002
2011
35 years
Jefferson
Jefferson
WI
—
330
2,384
—
330
2,384
2,714
289
2,425
1997
2011
35 years
Harmony of Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
3,769
1,180
8,717
—
1,180
8,717
9,897
964
8,933
1999
2011
35 years
Harbor House Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
710
3,254
520
710
3,774
4,484
376
4,108
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Madison
Madison
WI
3,902
650
4,279
—
650
4,279
4,929
537
4,392
1998
2011
35 years
Harmony of Manitowoc
Manitowoc
WI
4,579
450
10,101
—
450
10,101
10,551
1,116
9,435
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Manitowoc
Manitowoc
WI
—
140
1,520
—
140
1,520
1,660
178
1,482
1997
2011
35 years
Harmony of McFarland
McFarland
WI
3,498
640
4,647
—
640
4,647
5,287
561
4,726
1998
2011
35 years
Adare II
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
20
110
557
667
84
583
1994
2011
35 years
Adare IV
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
5
110
542
652
80
572
1994
2011
35 years
Adare III
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
5
90
562
652
86
566
1993
2011
35 years
Adare I
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
5
90
562
652
82
570
1993
2011
35 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
Riverview Village
Menomonee Falls
WI
5,545
2,170
11,758
—
2,170
11,758
13,928
1,291
12,637
2003
2011
35 years
The Arboretum
Menomonee Falls
WI
4,920
5,640
49,083
583
5,640
49,666
55,306
5,694
49,612
1989
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee I
Milwaukee
WI
—
1,800
935
119
1,800
1,054
2,854
164
2,690
1999
2011
35 years
Hart Park Square
Milwaukee
WI
6,600
1,900
21,628
—
1,900
21,628
23,528
2,458
21,070
2005
2011
35 years
Harbor House Monroe
Monroe
WI
—
490
4,964
—
490
4,964
5,454
559
4,895
1990
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah I
Neenah
WI
—
710
1,157
64
713
1,218
1,931
184
1,747
2006
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah II
Neenah
WI
—
720
2,339
(50
)
720
2,289
3,009
305
2,704
2007
2011
35 years
Matthews of Irish Road
Neenah
WI
—
320
1,036
87
320
1,123
1,443
172
1,271
2001
2011
35 years
Matthews of Oak Creek
Oak Creek
WI
—
800
2,167
(2
)
812
2,153
2,965
275
2,690
1997
2011
35 years
Wilkinson Woods of Oconomowoc
Oconomowoc
WI
—
1,100
12,436
—
1,100
12,436
13,536
1,395
12,141
1992
2011
35 years
Harbor House Oshkosh
Oshkosh
WI
—
190
949
—
190
949
1,139
146
993
1993
2011
35 years
Harmony of Racine
Racine
WI
9,173
590
11,726
—
590
11,726
12,316
1,271
11,045
1998
2011
35 years
Harmony of Commons of Racine
Racine
WI
—
630
11,245
—
630
11,245
11,875
1,231
10,644
2003
2011
35 years
Harmony of Sheboygan
Sheboygan
WI
8,488
810
17,908
—
810
17,908
18,718
1,952
16,766
1996
2011
35 years
Harbor House Sheboygan
Sheboygan
WI
—
1,060
6,208
—
1,060
6,208
7,268
684
6,584
1995
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis I
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,428
(113
)
1,389
1,296
2,685
198
2,487
2000
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis II
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,666
15
1,377
1,674
3,051
225
2,826
2000
2011
35 years
Howard Village of St. Francis
St. Francis
WI
5,040
2,320
17,232
—
2,320
17,232
19,552
2,004
17,548
2001
2011
35 years
Harmony of Stevens Point
Stevens Point
WI
7,746
790
10,081
—
790
10,081
10,871
1,133
9,738
2002
2011
35 years
Harmony Commons of Stevens Point
Stevens Point
WI
—
760
2,242
—
760
2,242
3,002
334
2,668
2005
2011
35 years
Harmony of Stoughton
Stoughton
WI
1,539
490
9,298
—
490
9,298
9,788
1,028
8,760
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Stoughton
Stoughton
WI
—
450
3,191
—
450
3,191
3,641
389
3,252
1992
2011
35 years
Harmony of Two Rivers
Two Rivers
WI
2,471
330
3,538
—
330
3,538
3,868
421
3,447
1998
2011
35 years
Matthews of Pewaukee
Waukesha
WI
—
1,180
4,124
206
1,197
4,313
5,510
564
4,946
2001
2011
35 years
Oak Hill Terrace
Waukesha
WI
4,975
2,040
40,298
—
2,040
40,298
42,338
4,561
37,777
1985
2011
35 years
Harmony of Terrace Court
Wausau
WI
6,894
430
5,037
—
430
5,037
5,467
583
4,884
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Terrace Commons
Wausau
WI
—
740
6,556
—
740
6,556
7,296
765
6,531
2000
2011
35 years
Harbor House Rib Mountain
Wausau
WI
—
350
3,413
—
350
3,413
3,763
389
3,374
1997
2011
35 years
Library Square
West Allis
WI
5,150
1,160
23,714
—
1,160
23,714
24,874
2,687
22,187
1996
2011
35 years
Harmony of Wisconsin Rapids
Wisconsin Rapids
WI
1,030
520
4,349
—
520
4,349
4,869
533
4,336
2000
2011
35 years
Matthews of Wrightstown
Wrightstown
WI
—
140
376
12
140
388
528
85
443
1999
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Teays Valley
Hurricane
WV
—
1,950
14,489
—
1,950
14,489
16,439
1,594
14,845
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinsburg
Martinsburg
WV
—
248
8,320
—
248
8,320
8,568
1,941
6,627
1999
2006
35 years
Garden Square Assisted Living of Casper
Casper
WY
—
355
3,197
—
355
3,197
3,552
321
3,231
1996
2011
35 years
Whispering Chase
Cheyenne
WY
—
1,800
20,354
—
1,800
20,354
22,154
854
21,300
2008
2013
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
TOTAL FOR OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
199,098
427,854
4,125,784
(10,950
)
424,333
4,118,355
4,542,688
450,160
4,092,528
TOTAL FOR SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
1,723,660
1,411,948
13,480,887
319,745
1,415,658
13,796,922
15,212,580
2,071,110
13,141,470
PERSONAL CARE AND OTHER FACILITIES
ResCare Tangram - Hacienda
Kingsbury
TX
—
31
841
84
78
878
956
692
264
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Texas Hill Country School
Maxwell
TX
—
54
934
8
62
934
996
759
237
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Chaparral
Maxwell
TX
—
82
552
150
82
702
784
465
319
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Sierra Verde & Roca Vista
Maxwell
TX
—
20
910
56
20
966
986
748
238
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - 618 W. Hutchinson
San Marcos
TX
—
226
1,175
(480
)
126
795
921
646
275
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Ranch
Seguin
TX
—
147
806
113
147
919
1,066
669
397
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Mesquite
Seguin
TX
—
15
1,078
140
15
1,218
1,233
882
351
N/A
1998
20 years
ResCare Tangram - Loma Linda
Seguin
TX
—
40
220
—
40
220
260
179
81
N/A
1998
20 years
Spire Hull and East Riding Hospital
Anlaby
Hull
—
3,194
81,613
—
3,194
81,613
84,807
1,250
83,557
1986
2014
50 years
Spire Fylde Coast Hospital
Blackpool
Lan-cashire
—
2,446
28,896
—
2,446
28,896
31,342
449
30,893
1980
2014
50 years
Spire Clare Park Hospital
Farnham
Surrey
—
6,263
26,119
—
6,263
26,119
32,382
422
31,960
1980
2014
50 years
TOTAL FOR PERSONAL CARE FACILITIES
—
12,518
143,144
71
12,473
143,260
155,733
7,161
148,572
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
MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #46
Birmingham
AL
—
—
25,298
3,820
—
29,118
29,118
4,836
24,282
2005
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #48
Birmingham
AL
—
—
12,698
391
—
13,089
13,089
2,356
10,733
1989
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #52
Birmingham
AL
—
—
7,608
923
—
8,531
8,531
1,821
6,710
1985
2010
35 years
Crestwood Medical Pavilion
Huntsville
AL
4,553
625
16,178
76
625
16,254
16,879
2,040
14,839
1994
2011
35 years
Canyon Springs Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
15,653
—
27,497
66
—
27,563
27,563
2,941
24,622
2007
2012
35 years
Mercy Gilbert Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
7,779
720
11,277
273
720
11,550
12,270
1,701
10,569
2007
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza
Glendale
AZ
—
—
12,904
509
—
13,413
13,413
1,448
11,965
1997
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza II
Glendale
AZ
—
—
8,100
222
—
8,322
8,322
996
7,326
2001
2011
35 years
Desert Medical Pavilion
Mesa
AZ
—
—
32,768
11
—
32,779
32,779
1,895
30,884
2003
2013
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building I
Mesa
AZ
—
—
11,923
445
—
12,368
12,368
1,300
11,068
1977
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building II
Mesa
AZ
—
—
7,395
44
—
7,439
7,439
895
6,544
1980
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building III
Mesa
AZ
—
—
13,665
657
—
14,322
14,322
1,572
12,750
1986
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building II
Phoenix
AZ
13,261
—
22,663
492
14
23,141
23,155
2,522
20,633
2002
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building III
Phoenix
AZ
10,931
—
19,521
21
12
19,530
19,542
2,123
17,419
2009
2011
35 years
Papago Medical Park
Phoenix
AZ
—
—
12,172
305
—
12,477
12,477
1,622
10,855
1989
2011
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza
Burbank
CA
—
1,241
23,322
412
1,241
23,734
24,975
3,352
21,623
2004
2011
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza II
Burbank
CA
35,606
491
45,641
156
491
45,797
46,288
5,258
41,030
2008
2011
35 years
Eden Medical Plaza
Castro Valley
CA
—
258
2,455
139
258
2,594
2,852
591
2,261
1998
2011
25 years
PMB Chula Vista
Chula Vista
CA
15,421
2,964
19,393
169
2,964
19,562
22,526
2,797
19,729
2001
2011
35 years
NorthBay Corporate Headquarters
Fairfield
CA
—
—
19,187
—
—
19,187
19,187
1,225
17,962
2008
2012
35 years
Gateway Medical Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
12,872
24
—
12,896
12,896
820
12,076
1986
2012
35 years
Solano NorthBay Health Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,880
—
—
8,880
8,880
562
8,318
1990
2012
35 years
NorthBay Healthcare MOB
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,507
2,280
—
10,787
10,787
460
10,327
CIP
2013
CIP
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg I
Glendale
CA
—
6,683
9,589
115
6,683
9,704
16,387
1,771
14,616
1972
2012
23 years
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg II
Glendale
CA
—
4,464
3,731
179
4,464
3,910
8,374
962
7,412
1987
2012
19 years
St. Francis Lynwood Medical
Lynwood
CA
—
688
8,385
532
688
8,917
9,605
1,810
7,795
1993
2011
32 years
PMB Mission Hills
Mission Hills
CA
—
15,468
30,116
4,729
15,468
34,845
50,313
2,099
48,214
2012
2012
35 years
PDP Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
44,242
1,916
77,022
183
1,916
77,205
79,121
9,153
69,968
2007
2011
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
PDP Orange
Orange
CA
47,267
1,752
61,647
85
1,761
61,723
63,484
7,571
55,913
2008
2011
35 years
NHP/PMB Pasadena
Pasadena
CA
—
3,138
83,412
8,484
3,138
91,896
95,034
12,075
82,959
2009
2011
35 years
Western University of Health Sciences Medical Pavilion
Pomona
CA
—
91
31,523
—
91
31,523
31,614
3,525
28,089
2009
2011
35 years
Pomerado Outpatient Pavilion
Poway
CA
—
3,233
71,435
2,852
3,233
74,287
77,520
9,538
67,982
2007
2011
35 years
Sutter Medical Center
San Diego
CA
—
—
25,088
1,371
—
26,459
26,459
1,549
24,910
2012
2012
35 years
San Gabriel Valley Medical
San Gabriel
CA
8,881
914
5,510
186
914
5,696
6,610
1,142
5,468
2004
2011
35 years
Santa Clarita Valley Medical
Santa Clarita
CA
21,850
9,708
20,020
325
9,726
20,327
30,053
2,690
27,363
2005
2011
35 years
Kenneth E Watts Medical Plaza
Torrance
CA
—
262
6,945
749
291
7,665
7,956
1,564
6,392
1989
2011
23 years
Vaca Valley Health Plaza
Vacaville
CA
—
—
9,634
—
—
9,634
9,634
609
9,025
1988
2012
35 years
Potomac Medical Plaza
Aurora
CO
—
2,401
9,118
2,081
2,464
11,136
13,600
4,279
9,321
1986
2007
35 years
Briargate Medical Campus
Colorado Springs
CO
—
1,238
12,301
300
1,244
12,595
13,839
3,588
10,251
2002
2007
35 years
Printers Park Medical Plaza
Colorado Springs
CO
—
2,641
47,507
1,420
2,641
48,927
51,568
13,399
38,169
1999
2007
35 years
Green Valley Ranch MOB
Denver
CO
5,939
—
12,139
144
235
12,048
12,283
736
11,547
2007
2012
35 years
Community Physicians Pavilion
Lafayette
CO
—
—
10,436
1,330
—
11,766
11,766
2,043
9,723
2004
2010
35 years
Exempla Good Samaritan Medical Center
Lafayette
CO
—
—
4,393
5
—
4,398
4,398
134
4,264
2013
2013
35 years
Avista Two Medical Plaza
Louisville
CO
—
—
17,330
1,644
—
18,974
18,974
4,088
14,886
2003
2009
35 years
The Sierra Medical Building
Parker
CO
491
1,444
14,059
3,071
1,474
17,100
18,574
4,168
14,406
2009
2009
35 years
Crown Point Healthcare Plaza
Parker
CO
—
852
5,210
—
852
5,210
6,062
286
5,776
2008
2013
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building II
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
2,655
819
—
3,474
3,474
782
2,692
1976
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building IV
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
7,266
883
—
8,149
8,149
1,455
6,694
1991
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building III
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
11,947
11
—
11,958
11,958
2,177
9,781
2004
2010
35 years
DePaul Professional Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
6,424
1,775
—
8,199
8,199
2,126
6,073
1987
2010
35 years
Providence Medical Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
2,473
509
—
2,982
2,982
898
2,084
1975
2010
35 years
RTS Arcadia
Arcadia
FL
—
345
2,884
—
345
2,884
3,229
415
2,814
1993
2011
30 years
RTS Cape Coral
Cape Coral
FL
—
368
5,448
—
368
5,448
5,816
662
5,154
1984
2011
34 years
RTS Englewood
Englewood
FL
—
1,071
3,516
—
1,071
3,516
4,587
458
4,129
1992
2011
35 years
RTS Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,153
4,127
—
1,153
4,127
5,280
601
4,679
1989
2011
31 years
RTS Key West
Key West
FL
—
486
4,380
—
486
4,380
4,866
474
4,392
1987
2011
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
JFK Medical Plaza
Lake Worth
FL
—
453
1,711
139
453
1,850
2,303
632
1,671
1999
2004
35 years
Palms West Building 6
Loxahatchee
FL
—
965
2,678
45
965
2,723
3,688
825
2,863
2000
2004
35 years
Aventura Heart & Health
Miami
FL
15,978
—
25,361
2,961
—
28,322
28,322
8,899
19,423
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Naples
Naples
FL
—
1,152
3,726
—
1,152
3,726
4,878
458
4,420
1999
2011
35 years
Woodlands Center for Specialized Med
Pensacola
FL
15,298
2,518
24,006
29
2,518
24,035
26,553
2,570
23,983
2009
2012
35 years
RTS Pt. Charlotte
Pt Charlotte
FL
—
966
4,581
—
966
4,581
5,547
591
4,956
1985
2011
34 years
RTS Sarasota
Sarasota
FL
—
1,914
3,889
—
1,914
3,889
5,803
529
5,274
1996
2011
35 years
University Medical Office Building
Tamarac
FL
—
—
6,690
132
—
6,822
6,822
2,020
4,802
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Venice
Venice
FL
—
1,536
4,104
—
1,536
4,104
5,640
537
5,103
1997
2011
35 years
Augusta Medical Plaza
Augusta
GA
—
594
4,847
422
594
5,269
5,863
1,159
4,704
1972
2011
25 years
Augusta Professional Building
Augusta
GA
—
687
6,057
458
691
6,511
7,202
1,499
5,703
1983
2011
27 years
Augusta POB I
Augusta
GA
—
233
7,894
502
233
8,396
8,629
2,176
6,453
1978
2012
14 years
Augusta POB II
Augusta
GA
—
735
13,717
1
735
13,718
14,453
2,569
11,884
1987
2012
23 years
Augusta POB III
Augusta
GA
—
535
3,857
144
535
4,001
4,536
865
3,671
1994
2012
22 years
Augusta POB IV
Augusta
GA
—
675
2,182
827
675
3,009
3,684
621
3,063
1995
2012
23 years
Cobb Physicians Center
Austell
GA
—
1,145
16,805
867
1,145
17,672
18,817
2,896
15,921
1992
2011
35 years
Columbia Medical Plaza
Evans
GA
—
268
1,497
131
268
1,628
1,896
482
1,414
1940
2011
23 years
Parkway Physicians Center
Ringgold
GA
—
476
10,017
366
476
10,383
10,859
1,601
9,258
2004
2011
35 years
Eastside Physicians Center
Snellville
GA
—
1,289
25,019
1,814
1,296
26,826
28,122
6,163
21,959
1994
2008
35 years
Eastside Physicians Plaza
Snellville
GA
6,533
294
12,948
(28
)
297
12,917
13,214
2,777
10,437
2003
2008
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building I
Barrington
IL
—
152
3,224
59
152
3,283
3,435
160
3,275
1979
2013
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building II
Barrington
IL
—
512
12,977
106
512
13,083
13,595
657
12,938
1996
2013
35 years
Trinity Hospital Physician Office Building
Chicago
IL
—
139
3,329
11
139
3,340
3,479
193
3,286
1971
2013
35 years
Physicians Plaza East
Decatur
IL
—
—
791
612
—
1,403
1,403
498
905
1976
2010
35 years
Physicians Plaza West
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,943
226
—
2,169
2,169
656
1,513
1987
2010
35 years
Kenwood Medical Center
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,900
39
—
3,939
3,939
1,156
2,783
1996
2010
35 years
304 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
8,702
146
—
8,848
8,848
1,784
7,064
2002
2010
35 years
302 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,467
122
—
3,589
3,589
990
2,599
1993
2010
35 years
ENTA
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,150
—
—
1,150
1,150
249
901
1996
2010
35 years
301 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
640
—
—
640
640
192
448
1980
2010
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
South Shore Medical Building
Decatur
IL
—
902
129
—
902
129
1,031
119
912
1991
2010
35 years
SIU Family Practice
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,689
19
—
1,708
1,708
411
1,297
1997
2010
35 years
Corporate Health Services
Decatur
IL
—
934
1,386
—
934
1,386
2,320
368
1,952
1996
2010
35 years
Rock Springs Medical
Decatur
IL
—
399
495
—
399
495
894
140
754
1990
2010
35 years
575 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
111
739
—
111
739
850
176
674
1984
2010
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building I
Downers Grove
IL
—
407
10,337
115
407
10,452
10,859
514
10,345
1976
2013
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building II
Downers Grove
IL
—
1,013
25,370
43
1,013
25,413
26,426
1,257
25,169
1995
2013
35 years
Eberle Medical Office Building ("Eberle MOB")
Elk Grove Village
IL
—
—
16,315
93
—
16,408
16,408
4,683
11,725
2005
2009
35 years
1425 Hunt Club Road MOB
Gurnee
IL
—
249
1,452
62
249
1,514
1,763
333
1,430
2005
2011
34 years
1445 Hunt Club Drive
Gurnee
IL
—
216
1,405
297
216
1,702
1,918
487
1,431
2002
2011
31 years
Gurnee Imaging Center
Gurnee
IL
—
82
2,731
—
82
2,731
2,813
353
2,460
2002
2011
35 years
Gurnee Center Club
Gurnee
IL
—
627
17,851
—
627
17,851
18,478
2,421
16,057
2001
2011
35 years
South Suburban Hospital Physician Office Building
Hazel Crest
IL
—
191
4,370
2
191
4,372
4,563
250
4,313
1989
2013
35 years
Doctors Office Building III ("DOB III")
Hoffman Estates
IL
—
—
24,550
66
—
24,616
24,616
6,115
18,501
2005
2009
35 years
755 Milwaukee MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
421
3,716
885
479
4,543
5,022
1,406
3,616
1990
2011
18 years
890 Professional MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
214
2,630
122
214
2,752
2,966
561
2,405
1980
2011
26 years
Libertyville Center Club
Libertyville
IL
—
1,020
17,176
—
1,020
17,176
18,196
2,394
15,802
1988
2011
35 years
Christ Medical Center Physician Office Building
Oak Lawn
IL
—
658
16,421
1
658
16,422
17,080
814
16,266
1986
2013
35 years
Round Lake ACC
Round Lake
IL
—
758
370
80
785
423
1,208
286
922
1984
2011
13 years
Vernon Hills Acute Care Center
Vernon Hills
IL
—
3,376
694
153
3,413
810
4,223
370
3,853
1986
2011
15 years
Wilbur S. Roby Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,653
562
—
3,215
3,215
777
2,438
1992
2010
35 years
Ambulatory Services Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
4,266
1,077
—
5,343
5,343
1,364
3,979
1995
2010
35 years
St. John's Medical Arts Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,281
422
—
2,703
2,703
685
2,018
1973
2010
35 years
Carmel I
Carmel
IN
—
466
5,954
38
466
5,992
6,458
820
5,638
1985
2012
30 years
Carmel II
Carmel
IN
—
455
5,976
71
455
6,047
6,502
779
5,723
1989
2012
33 years
Carmel III
Carmel
IN
—
422
6,194
53
422
6,247
6,669
696
5,973
2001
2012
35 years
Elkhart
Elkhart
IN
1,201
1,256
1,973
—
1,256
1,973
3,229
598
2,631
1994
2011
32 years
Harcourt Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
519
28,951
783
519
29,734
30,253
3,707
26,546
1973
2012
28 years
Cardiac Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
498
27,430
344
498
27,774
28,272
2,908
25,364
1995
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
Oncology Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
470
5,703
152
470
5,855
6,325
735
5,590
2003
2012
35 years
St. Francis South Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
—
20,649
469
—
21,118
21,118
1,333
19,785
1995
2013
35 years
Methodist Professional Center I
Indianapolis
IN
—
61
37,411
2,142
61
39,553
39,614
4,993
34,621
1985
2012
25 years
LaPorte
La Porte
IN
746
553
1,309
—
553
1,309
1,862
258
1,604
1997
2011
34 years
Mishawaka
Mishawaka
IN
3,440
3,787
5,543
—
3,787
5,543
9,330
1,746
7,584
1993
2011
35 years
South Bend
South Bend
IN
1,416
792
2,530
—
792
2,530
3,322
412
2,910
1996
2011
34 years
OLBH Same Day Surgery Center MOB
Ashland
KY
—
101
19,066
144
101
19,210
19,311
2,401
16,910
1997
2012
26 years
St. Elizabeth Covington
Covington
KY
—
345
12,790
(16
)
345
12,774
13,119
1,353
11,766
2009
2012
35 years
St. Elizabeth Florence MOB
Florence
KY
—
402
8,279
702
402
8,981
9,383
1,189
8,194
2005
2012
35 years
Jefferson Clinic
Louisville
KY
—
—
673
2,018
—
2,691
2,691
32
2,659
2013
2013
35 years
East Jefferson Medical Plaza
Metairie
LA
—
168
17,264
81
168
17,345
17,513
2,881
14,632
1996
2012
32 years
East Jefferson MOB
Metairie
LA
—
107
15,137
154
107
15,291
15,398
2,528
12,870
1985
2012
28 years
Lakeside POB I
Metairie
LA
—
3,334
4,974
1,979
3,334
6,953
10,287
1,510
8,777
1986
2011
22 years
Lakeside POB II
Metairie
LA
—
1,046
802
419
1,046
1,221
2,267
501
1,766
1980
2011
7 years
RTS Berlin
Berlin
MD
—
—
2,216
—
—
2,216
2,216
294
1,922
1994
2011
29 years
Charles O. Fisher Medical Building
Westminster
MD
11,298
—
13,795
1,290
—
15,085
15,085
3,989
11,096
2009
2009
35 years
Medical Specialties Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
19,242
952
—
20,194
20,194
3,564
16,630
1989
2010
35 years
North Professional Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
7,228
617
—
7,845
7,845
1,383
6,462
1983
2010
35 years
Borgess Navigation Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
2,391
—
—
2,391
2,391
509
1,882
1976
2010
35 years
Borgess Health & Fitness Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
11,959
170
—
12,129
12,129
2,555
9,574
1984
2010
35 years
Heart Center Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
8,420
345
—
8,765
8,765
1,805
6,960
1980
2010
35 years
Medical Commons Building
Kalamazoo Township
MI
—
—
661
6
—
667
667
139
528
1979
2010
35 years
RTS Madison Heights
Madison Heights
MI
—
401
2,946
—
401
2,946
3,347
376
2,971
2002
2011
35 years
RTS Monroe
Monroe
MI
—
281
3,450
—
281
3,450
3,731
494
3,237
1997
2011
31 years
Pro Med Center Plainwell
Plainwell
MI
—
—
697
—
—
697
697
166
531
1991
2010
35 years
Pro Med Center Richland
Richland
MI
—
233
2,267
30
233
2,297
2,530
452
2,078
1996
2010
35 years
Cogdell Duluth MOB
Duluth
MN
—
—
33,406
(19
)
—
33,387
33,387
2,300
31,087
2012
2012
35 years
HealthPartners Medical & Dental Clinics
Sartell
MN
—
2,492
15,694
46
2,503
15,729
18,232
1,837
16,395
2010
2012
35 years
Arnold Urgent Care
Arnold
MO
—
1,058
556
82
1,097
599
1,696
282
1,414
1999
2011
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
DePaul Health Center North
Bridgeton
MO
—
996
10,045
472
996
10,517
11,513
1,788
9,725
1976
2012
21 years
DePaul Health Center South
Bridgeton
MO
—
910
12,169
358
910
12,527
13,437
1,652
11,785
1992
2012
30 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB D
Clayton
MO
—
103
2,780
438
103
3,218
3,321
563
2,758
1984
2012
22 years
Fenton Urgent Care Center
Fenton
MO
—
183
2,714
137
183
2,851
3,034
559
2,475
2003
2011
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
305
7,445
2,154
305
9,599
9,904
795
9,109
1988
2012
32 years
St. Joseph Medical Mall
Kansas City
MO
—
530
9,115
183
530
9,298
9,828
1,095
8,733
1995
2012
33 years
Carondelet Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
745
12,437
389
745
12,826
13,571
1,587
11,984
1979
2012
29 years
St. Joseph Hospital West Medical Office Building II
Lake Saint Louis
MO
—
524
3,229
142
524
3,371
3,895
460
3,435
2005
2012
35 years
St. Joseph O'Fallon Medical Office Building
O'Fallon
MO
—
940
5,556
9
940
5,565
6,505
592
5,913
1992
2012
35 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 1
St. Charles
MO
—
503
4,336
306
503
4,642
5,145
852
4,293
1987
2012
20 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 2
St. Charles
MO
—
369
2,963
85
369
3,048
3,417
461
2,956
1999
2012
32 years
Physicians Office Center
St. Louis
MO
—
1,445
13,825
278
1,445
14,103
15,548
2,833
12,715
2003
2011
35 years
12700 Southford Road Medical Plaza
St. Louis
MO
—
595
12,584
1,061
595
13,645
14,240
2,620
11,620
1993
2011
32 years
St Anthony's MOB A
St. Louis
MO
—
409
4,687
487
409
5,174
5,583
1,250
4,333
1975
2011
20 years
St Anthony's MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
350
3,942
235
350
4,177
4,527
1,202
3,325
1980
2011
21 years
Lemay Urgent Care Center
St. Louis
MO
—
2,317
3,120
285
2,339
3,383
5,722
977
4,745
1983
2011
22 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
119
4,161
570
119
4,731
4,850
723
4,127
1979
2012
23 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB C
St. Louis
MO
—
136
6,018
230
136
6,248
6,384
877
5,507
1969
2012
20 years
University Physicians - Grants Ferry
Flowood
MS
9,579
2,796
12,125
(13
)
2,796
12,112
14,908
1,410
13,498
2010
2012
35 years
Randolph
Charlotte
NC
—
6,370
2,929
332
6,370
3,261
9,631
1,839
7,792
1973
2012
4 years
Mallard Crossing I
Charlotte
NC
—
3,229
2,072
351
3,229
2,423
5,652
834
4,818
1997
2012
25 years
Medical Arts Building
Concord
NC
—
701
11,734
170
701
11,904
12,605
2,016
10,589
1997
2012
31 years
Gateway Medical Office Building
Concord
NC
—
1,100
9,904
284
1,100
10,188
11,288
1,590
9,698
2005
2012
35 years
Copperfield Medical Mall
Concord
NC
—
1,980
2,846
256
1,980
3,102
5,082
684
4,398
1989
2012
25 years
Weddington Internal & Pediatric Medicine
Concord
NC
—
574
688
4
574
692
1,266
171
1,095
2000
2012
27 years
Gaston Professional Center
Gastonia
NC
—
833
24,885
593
833
25,478
26,311
2,923
23,388
1997
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Family Physicians
Harrisburg
NC
—
679
1,646
5
679
1,651
2,330
212
2,118
1996
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Medical Mall
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,339
2,292
148
1,339
2,440
3,779
646
3,133
1997
2012
27 years
Northcross
Huntersville
NC
—
623
278
(1
)
623
277
900
153
747
1993
2012
22 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
REX Knightdale MOB & Wellness Center
Knightdale
NC
—
—
22,823
—
—
22,823
22,823
1,437
21,386
2009
2012
35 years
Alamance Regional Mebane Outpatient Ctr.
Mebane
NC
11,793
1,963
14,291
(9
)
1,963
14,282
16,245
2,197
14,048
2008
2012
35 years
Midland Medical Park
Midland
NC
—
1,221
847
19
1,221
866
2,087
303
1,784
1998
2012
25 years
East Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
803
998
(2
)
803
996
1,799
220
1,579
2000
2012
33 years
Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
479
1,297
39
479
1,336
1,815
285
1,530
1990
2012
25 years
Rocky Mount Medical Park
Rocky Mount
NC
—
2,552
7,779
292
2,577
8,046
10,623
1,238
9,385
1991
2012
30 years
English Road Medical Center
Rocky Mount
NC
4,519
1,321
3,747
4
1,321
3,751
5,072
717
4,355
2002
2012
35 years
Rowan Outpatient Surgery Center
Salisbury
NC
—
1,039
5,184
(5
)
1,039
5,179
6,218
633
5,585
2003
2012
35 years
Del E Webb Medical Plaza
Henderson
NV
—
1,028
16,993
844
1,028
17,837
18,865
2,786
16,079
1999
2011
35 years
The Terrace at South Meadows
Reno
NV
6,835
504
9,966
442
504
10,408
10,912
1,705
9,207
2004
2011
35 years
Central NY Medical Center
Syracuse
NY
24,500
1,786
26,101
1,219
1,786
27,320
29,106
3,459
25,647
1997
2012
33 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building I
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
9,632
1,617
—
11,249
11,249
3,352
7,897
1984
2007
35 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building II
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
15,123
2,247
—
17,370
17,370
4,772
12,598
2007
2007
35 years
Riverside North Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
8,420
785
8,519
658
785
9,177
9,962
1,508
8,454
1962
2012
25 years
Riverside South Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
6,311
586
7,298
526
586
7,824
8,410
1,067
7,343
1985
2012
27 years
340 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
5,862
10
9,443
443
10
9,886
9,896
1,178
8,718
1984
2012
29 years
393 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
3,288
61
4,760
43
61
4,803
4,864
733
4,131
1970
2012
20 years
141 South Sixth Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
1,544
80
1,113
(1
)
80
1,112
1,192
268
924
1971
2012
14 years
Doctors West Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
4,705
414
5,362
505
414
5,867
6,281
750
5,531
1998
2012
35 years
Eastside Health Center
Columbus
OH
4,399
956
3,472
(2
)
956
3,470
4,426
785
3,641
1977
2012
15 years
East Main Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
5,226
440
4,771
47
440
4,818
5,258
532
4,726
2006
2012
35 years
Heart Center Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
1,063
12,140
157
1,063
12,297
13,360
1,494
11,866
2004
2012
35 years
Wilkins Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
123
18,062
26
123
18,088
18,211
1,766
16,445
2002
2012
35 years
Grady Medical Office Building
Delaware
OH
1,824
239
2,263
253
239
2,516
2,755
430
2,325
1991
2012
25 years
Dublin Northwest Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
3,118
342
3,278
12
342
3,290
3,632
462
3,170
2001
2012
34 years
Preserve III Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
9,684
2,449
7,025
(66
)
2,449
6,959
9,408
917
8,491
2006
2012
35 years
Zanesville Surgery Center
Zanesville
OH
—
172
9,403
—
172
9,403
9,575
1,145
8,430
2000
2011
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
Dialysis Center
Zanesville
OH
—
534
855
28
534
883
1,417
284
1,133
1960
2011
21 years
Genesis Children's Center
Zanesville
OH
—
538
3,781
—
538
3,781
4,319
638
3,681
2006
2011
30 years
Medical Arts Building I
Zanesville
OH
—
429
2,405
115
436
2,513
2,949
599
2,350
1970
2011
20 years
Medical Arts Building II
Zanesville
OH
—
485
6,013
289
490
6,297
6,787
1,530
5,257
1995
2011
25 years
Medical Arts Building III
Zanesville
OH
—
94
1,248
—
94
1,248
1,342
289
1,053
1970
2011
25 years
Primecare Building
Zanesville
OH
—
130
1,344
79
130
1,423
1,553
383
1,170
1978
2011
20 years
Outpatient Rehabilitation Building
Zanesville
OH
—
82
1,541
—
82
1,541
1,623
281
1,342
1985
2011
28 years
Radiation Oncology Building
Zanesville
OH
—
105
1,201
—
105
1,201
1,306
257
1,049
1988
2011
25 years
Healthplex
Zanesville
OH
—
2,488
15,849
540
2,488
16,389
18,877
2,787
16,090
1990
2011
32 years
Physicians Pavilion
Zanesville
OH
—
422
6,297
292
422
6,589
7,011
1,396
5,615
1990
2011
25 years
Zanesville Northside Pharmacy
Zanesville
OH
—
42
635
—
42
635
677
120
557
1985
2011
28 years
Bethesda Campus MOB III
Zanesville
OH
—
188
1,137
116
193
1,248
1,441
242
1,199
1978
2011
25 years
Tuality 7th Avenue Medical Plaza
Hillsboro
OR
19,054
1,516
24,638
338
1,516
24,976
26,492
3,616
22,876
2003
2011
35 years
Professional Office Building I
Chester
PA
—
—
6,283
1,251
—
7,534
7,534
3,055
4,479
1978
2004
30 years
DCMH Medical Office Building
Drexel Hill
PA
—
—
10,424
1,213
—
11,637
11,637
4,897
6,740
1984
2004
30 years
Penn State University Outpatient Center
Hershey
PA
57,415
—
55,439
—
—
55,439
55,439
8,768
46,671
2008
2010
35 years
Lancaster Rehabilitation Hospital
Lancaster
PA
—
959
16,610
(16
)
959
16,594
17,553
1,824
15,729
2007
2012
35 years
Lancaster ASC MOB
Lancaster
PA
9,272
593
17,117
(4
)
593
17,113
17,706
2,112
15,594
2007
2012
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Office Building
Reading
PA
—
—
10,823
784
—
11,607
11,607
2,076
9,531
2006
2010
35 years
Doylestown Health & Wellness Center
Warrington
PA
—
4,452
17,383
286
4,497
17,624
22,121
2,426
19,695
2001
2012
34 years
Roper Medical Office Building
Charleston
SC
8,571
127
14,737
1,595
127
16,332
16,459
2,316
14,143
1990
2012
28 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Charleston)
Charleston
SC
—
447
3,946
298
447
4,244
4,691
679
4,012
2003
2012
35 years
Providence MOB I
Columbia
SC
—
225
4,274
79
225
4,353
4,578
1,056
3,522
1979
2012
18 years
Providence MOB II
Columbia
SC
—
122
1,834
12
122
1,846
1,968
457
1,511
1985
2012
18 years
Providence MOB III
Columbia
SC
—
766
4,406
221
766
4,627
5,393
832
4,561
1990
2012
23 years
One Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
210
7,939
116
214
8,051
8,265
1,662
6,603
1984
2012
19 years
Three Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
40
10,650
326
40
10,976
11,016
1,879
9,137
1988
2012
25 years
St. Francis Millennium Medical Office Building
Greenville
SC
15,358
—
13,062
10,495
30
23,527
23,557
6,124
17,433
2009
2009
35 years
200 Andrews
Greenville
SC
—
789
2,014
51
789
2,065
2,854
622
2,232
1994
2012
29 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
St. Francis CMOB
Greenville
SC
—
501
7,661
528
501
8,189
8,690
957
7,733
2001
2012
35 years
St. Francis Outpatient Surgery Center
Greenville
SC
—
1,007
16,538
(16
)
1,007
16,522
17,529
2,087
15,442
2001
2012
35 years
St. Francis Professional Medical Center
Greenville
SC
—
342
6,337
283
360
6,602
6,962
1,049
5,913
1984
2012
24 years
St. Francis Women's
Greenville
SC
—
322
4,877
70
322
4,947
5,269
1,078
4,191
1991
2012
24 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Greenville)
Greenville
SC
—
88
5,876
27
88
5,903
5,991
966
5,025
1998
2012
24 years
Irmo Professional MOB
Irmo
SC
—
1,726
5,414
64
1,726
5,478
7,204
1,070
6,134
2004
2011
35 years
River Hills Medical Plaza
Little River
SC
—
1,406
1,813
19
1,406
1,832
3,238
404
2,834
1999
2012
27 years
Mount Pleasant Medical Office Longpoint
Mount Pleasant
SC
—
670
4,455
72
670
4,527
5,197
976
4,221
2001
2012
34 years
Mary Black Westside Medical Office Bldg
Spartanburg
SC
—
291
5,057
81
291
5,138
5,429
819
4,610
1991
2012
31 years
Health Park Medical Office Building
Chattanooga
TN
6,421
2,305
8,949
26
2,305
8,975
11,280
1,099
10,181
2004
2012
35 years
Peerless Crossing Medical Center
Cleveland
TN
6,781
1,217
6,464
(7
)
1,217
6,457
7,674
752
6,922
2006
2012
35 years
Medical Center Physicians Tower
Jackson
TN
13,575
549
27,074
(7
)
549
27,067
27,616
3,222
24,394
2010
2012
35 years
Seton Medical Park Tower
Austin
TX
—
805
41,527
1,028
805
42,555
43,360
3,918
39,442
1968
2012
35 years
Seton Northwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
444
22,632
1,299
444
23,931
24,375
2,411
21,964
1988
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
294
5,311
32
294
5,343
5,637
526
5,111
2004
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza II
Austin
TX
—
447
10,154
20
447
10,174
10,621
946
9,675
2009
2012
35 years
East Houston MOB, LLC
Houston
TX
—
356
2,877
(286
)
328
2,619
2,947
1,010
1,937
1982
2011
15 years
East Houston Medical Plaza
Houston
TX
—
671
426
275
671
701
1,372
413
959
1982
2011
11 years
Seton Williamson Medical Plaza
Round Rock
TX
—
—
15,074
428
—
15,502
15,502
3,155
12,347
2008
2010
35 years
251 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,158
12,078
31
1,158
12,109
13,267
1,363
11,904
2006
2011
35 years
253 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,181
11,862
—
1,181
11,862
13,043
1,279
11,764
2009
2011
35 years
MRMC MOB I
Mechanicsville
VA
—
1,669
7,024
307
1,669
7,331
9,000
1,373
7,627
1993
2012
31 years
Henrico MOB
Richmond
VA
—
968
6,189
263
968
6,452
7,420
1,385
6,035
1976
2011
25 years
St. Mary's MOB North (Floors 6 & 7)
Richmond
VA
—
227
2,961
196
227
3,157
3,384
641
2,743
1968
2012
22 years
Bonney Lake Medical Office Building
Bonney Lake
WA
10,943
5,176
14,375
156
5,176
14,531
19,707
1,806
17,901
2011
2012
35 years
Good Samaritan Medical Office Building
Puyallup
WA
14,320
781
30,368
(130
)
781
30,238
31,019
3,042
27,977
2011
2012
35 years
Holy Family Hospital Central MOB
Spokane
WA
—
—
19,085
230
—
19,315
19,315
1,239
18,076
2007
2012
35 years
Physician's Pavilion
Vancouver
WA
—
1,411
32,939
253
1,411
33,192
34,603
4,842
29,761
2001
2011
35 years
183
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
Administration Building
Vancouver
WA
—
296
7,856
—
296
7,856
8,152
1,090
7,062
1972
2011
35 years
Medical Center Physician's Building
Vancouver
WA
—
1,225
31,246
1,626
1,225
32,872
34,097
4,222
29,875
1980
2011
35 years
Memorial MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
663
12,626
215
690
12,814
13,504
1,777
11,727
1999
2011
35 years
Salmon Creek MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,325
9,238
—
1,325
9,238
10,563
1,267
9,296
1994
2011
35 years
Fisher's Landing MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,590
5,420
—
1,590
5,420
7,010
896
6,114
1995
2011
34 years
Columbia Medical Plaza
Vancouver
WA
—
281
5,266
131
281
5,397
5,678
788
4,890
1991
2011
35 years
Appleton Heart Institute
Appleton
WI
—
—
7,775
1
—
7,776
7,776
1,453
6,323
2003
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices West
Appleton
WI
—
—
5,756
18
—
5,774
5,774
1,068
4,706
1989
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices South
Appleton
WI
—
—
9,058
167
—
9,225
9,225
1,727
7,498
1983
2010
39 years
Brookfield Clinic
Brookfield
WI
—
2,638
4,093
—
2,638
4,093
6,731
697
6,034
1999
2011
35 years
Hartland Clinic
Hartland
WI
—
321
5,050
—
321
5,050
5,371
733
4,638
1994
2011
35 years
Theda Clark Medical Center Office Pavilion
Neenah
WI
—
—
7,080
96
—
7,176
7,176
1,267
5,909
1993
2010
39 years
Aylward Medical Building Condo Floors 3 & 4
Neenah
WI
—
—
4,462
—
—
4,462
4,462
807
3,655
2006
2010
39 years
New Berlin Clinic
New Berlin
WI
—
678
7,121
—
678
7,121
7,799
1,110
6,689
1999
2011
35 years
WestWood Health & Fitness
Pewaukee
WI
—
823
11,649
—
823
11,649
12,472
1,832
10,640
1997
2011
35 years
Watertown Clinic
Watertown
WI
—
166
3,234
—
166
3,234
3,400
453
2,947
2003
2011
35 years
Southside Clinic
Waukesha
WI
—
218
5,273
—
218
5,273
5,491
748
4,743
1997
2011
35 years
Rehabilitation Hospital
Waukesha
WI
—
372
15,636
—
372
15,636
16,008
1,943
14,065
2008
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
561,101
219,188
2,925,201
117,655
219,950
3,042,094
3,262,044
458,589
2,803,455
TOTAL FOR ALL PROPERTIES
$
2,284,761
$
1,952,000
$
19,538,444
$
480,850
$
1,956,128
$
20,015,166
$
21,971,294
$
3,493,691
$
18,477,603
184
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE IV
REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE LOANS
December 31, 2014
(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
Florida
1
9.75%
F
12/31/2018
$
50
$
5,564
$
5,249
$
—
Washington
1
8.00%
F
8/1/2020
167
25,000
24,795
—
Washington
1
6.00%
F
7/5/2017
44
6,335
6,208
—
Multiple
27
8.93%
V
3/31/2017
577
83,107
83,107
—
California
11
9.42%
F
12/31/2017
1,627
179,495
174,790
—
Multiple
3
9.21%
V
6/30/2019
131
17,023
17,023
—
Texas
1
9.00%
F
12/1/2017
13
419
—
—
Second Mortgages
Multiple
9
10.50%
V
10/23/2019
45
5,000
4,959
*
Mezzanine Loans
Virginia
1
10.00%
F
12/10/2019
16
3,131
3,131
—
Multiple**
217
8.14%
F/V
12/9/2016
2,953
421,268
421,268
2,191,230
Construction Loans
Colorado
1
8.75%
V
2/6/2021
4
1,114
229
—
* 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
2014
2013
2012
(in thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
335,656
$
622,139
$
206,050
Additions:
New Loans
451,269
3,500
440,000
Construction Draws
—
694
12,119
Total additions
451,269
4,194
452,119
Deductions:
Principal Repayments
(15,548
)
(75,738
)
(36,030
)
Conversions to Real Property
(18,310
)
—
—
Sales and Syndications
(5,611
)
(214,939
)
—
Total deductions
(39,469
)
(290,677
)
(36,030
)
Ending Balance
$
747,456
$
335,656
$
622,139
185
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, 2014
. 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, 2014
, 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
2014
, 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
2015
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2015
.
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
2015
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2015
.
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
2015
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2015
.
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
186
Committee,” “Executive Compensation Committee” and “Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2015
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2015
.
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
2015
” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2015
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than April 30,
2015
.
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, 2014 and 2013
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
137
Schedule III — Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
138
Schedule IV — Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
185
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.
188
Exhibits
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
2.1
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of June 1, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Stripe Sub, LLC, Stripe OP, LP, American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. and American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 5, 2014.
2.2
First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of September 15, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Stripe Sub, LLC, Stripe OP, LP, American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. and American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 16, 2014.
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.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
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
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of November 16, 2010 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 3.125% Senior Notes due 2015.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 18, 2010.
4.4
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.
4.5
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.
4.6
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.
4.7
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.
189
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.8
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.
4.9
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.
4.10
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.
4.11
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.
4.12
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.
4.13
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.
4.14
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.
4.15
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.
4.16
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.
4.17
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.
4.18
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.
190
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.19
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.
4.20
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.
4.21
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.
4.22
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.
4.23
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.
4.24
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.
Filed herewith.
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, 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*
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.
10.4.1*
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.
10.4.2*
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.
10.4.3*
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.
10.5.1*
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.
191
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.5.2*
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.
10.5.3*
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.
10.5.4*
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.
10.6.1*
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.
10.6.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Filed herewith.
10.6.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Filed herewith.
10.6.4*
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.
10.6.5*
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.
10.6.6*
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.
10.7.1*
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.
10.7.2*
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.
10.8.1*
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.
10.8.2*
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.
10.9.1*
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.
10.9.2*
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.
10.10.1*
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.
192
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.10.2*
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.
10.11*
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.
10.12.1*
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.
10.12.2*
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.
10.12.3*
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.
10.12.4*
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.
10.12.5*
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.
10.13*
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.
10.14.1*
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.
10.14.2*
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.
10.14.3*
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.
10.15*
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.
10.16*
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.
10.17.1*
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.
10.17.2*
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.
10.18*
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.
193
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
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.
194
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 13, 2015
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.
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ DEBRA A. CAFARO
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
February 13, 2015
Debra A. Cafaro
/s/ ROBERT F. PROBST
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Acting Chief Accounting Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
February 13, 2015
Robert F. Probst
/s/ MELODY C. BARNES
Director
February 13, 2015
Melody C. Barnes
/s/ DOUGLAS CROCKER II
Director
February 13, 2015
Douglas Crocker II
/s/ RONALD G. GEARY
Director
February 13, 2015
Ronald G. Geary
/s/ JAY M. GELLERT
Director
February 13, 2015
Jay M. Gellert
/s/ RICHARD I. GILCHRIST
Director
February 13, 2015
Richard I. Gilchrist
/s/ MATTHEW J. LUSTIG
Director
February 13, 2015
Matthew J. Lustig
/s/ DOUGLAS M. PASQUALE
Director
February 13, 2015
Douglas M. Pasquale
195
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ ROBERT D. REED
Director
February 13, 2015
Robert D. Reed
/s/ GLENN J. RUFRANO
Director
February 13, 2015
Glenn J. Rufrano
/s/ JAMES D. SHELTON
Director
February 13, 2015
James D. Shelton
196
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
2.1
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of June 1, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Stripe Sub, LLC, Stripe OP, LP, American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. and American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 5, 2014.
2.2
First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of September 15, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Stripe Sub, LLC, Stripe OP, LP, American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. and American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 16, 2014.
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.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.
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
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of November 16, 2010 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 3.125% Senior Notes due 2015.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 18, 2010.
4.4
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.
4.5
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.
4.6
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.
4.7
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.
197
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.8
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.
4.9
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.
4.10
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.
4.11
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.
4.12
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.
4.13
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.
4.14
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.
4.15
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.
4.16
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.
4.17
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.
4.18
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.
198
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.19
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.
4.20
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.
4.21
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.
4.22
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.
4.23
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.
4.24
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.
Filed herewith.
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, 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*
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.
10.4.1*
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.
10.4.2*
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.
10.4.3*
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.
199
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.5.1*
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.
10.5.2*
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.
10.5.3*
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.
10.5.4*
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.
10.6.1*
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.
10.6.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Filed herewith.
10.6.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Filed herewith.
10.6.4*
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.
10.6.5*
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.
10.6.6*
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.
10.7.1*
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.
10.7.2*
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.
10.8.1*
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.
10.8.2*
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.
10.9.1*
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.
10.9.2*
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.
200
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.10.1*
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.
10.10.2*
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.
10.11*
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.
10.12.1*
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.
10.12.2*
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.
10.12.3*
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.
10.12.4*
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.
10.12.5*
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.
10.13*
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.
10.14.1*
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.
10.14.2*
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.
10.14.3*
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.
10.15*
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.
10.16*
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.
10.17.1*
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.
10.18*
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.
201
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
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.
202