Aveanna Healthcare Holdings Inc

Previous wording

Third-party payers including Medicare, Medicaid and private health insurance payers provide substantially all funding for our home health and hospice services, and we cannot control reimbursement rates. During the past several years, third-party healthcare payers in the adult home care and hospice space, such as federal and state governments, insurance companies and employers, have undertaken cost containment initiatives. As part of the efforts, such payers increasingly are demanding discounted fee structures or the assumption by healthcare providers of all or a portion of the financial risk relating to paying for care provided, often in exchange for exclusive or preferred participation in their benefit plans. We expect efforts to impose greater discounts and more stringent cost controls by government and other third-party payers to continue, thereby reducing the payments we receive for our services. For example, the Medicaid Integrity Program is increasing the scrutiny placed on Medicaid payments and could result in recoupments of alleged overpayments. CMS conducts similar audits on Medicare payments which may also result in recoupments of alleged overpayments. These payer audits are conducted by CMS contractors, many of whom are incentivized based upon the dollar value of said recoupments, specifically Recovery Audit Contractor (“RAC”) and Supplemental Medical Review Contractor (“SMRC”) audits, as well as the Unified Program Integrity Contractors (“UPIC”) program and the Zone Program Integrity Contractor (“UPIC”) program audits. While most audits are conducted on a post payment basis, including RAC, ZPIC, UPIC, and SMRC audits, CMS also performs Targeted Probe and Educate (“TPE”) audits on all home health and hospice providers to help reduce provider billing errors and educate providers on appropriate billing practices. These audits occasionally result in recoupment of Medicare reimbursement. Similarly, private third-party payers may be successful in negotiating reduced reimbursement schedules for our services. Fixed fee schedules, capitation payment arrangements, exclusion from participation in or inability to reach agreements with private insurance organizations or government funded programs, reduction or elimination of payments or an increase in the payments at a rate that is less than the increase in our costs, or other factors affecting payments for healthcare services over which we have no control could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition. Further, we cannot assure you that our services will be considered cost-effective by third-party payers, that reimbursement will continue to be available, or that changes to third-party payer reimbursement policies will not have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell our services on a profitable basis, if at all.

Current wording

Third-party payers including Medicare, Medicaid and private health insurance payers provide substantially all funding for our home health and hospice services, and we cannot control reimbursement rates. During the past several years, third-party healthcare payers in the adult home care and hospice space, such as federal and state governments, insurance companies and employers, have undertaken cost containment initiatives. As part of the efforts, such payers increasingly are demanding discounted fee structures or the assumption by healthcare providers of all or a portion of the financial risk relating to paying for care provided, often in exchange for exclusive or preferred participation in their benefit plans. We expect efforts to impose greater discounts and more stringent cost controls by government and other third-party payers to continue, thereby reducing the payments we receive for our services. For example, the CMS Medicaid Integrity Program is increasing the scrutiny placed on Medicaid payments and could result in recoupments of alleged overpayments. CMS conducts similar audits on Medicare payments which may also result in recoupments of alleged overpayments. These payer audits are conducted by CMS contractors, many of whom are incentivized based upon the dollar value of said recoupments, such as Recovery Audit Contractor (“RAC”) and Supplemental Medical Review Contractor (“SMRC”) audits, as well as the Unified Program Integrity Contractors (“UPIC”) program and the Zone Program Integrity Contractor (“ZPIC”) program audits. While most audits are conducted on a post payment basis, including RAC, ZPIC, UPIC, and SMRC audits, CMS also performs Targeted Probe and Educate (“TPE”) audits on all home health and hospice providers to help reduce provider billing errors and educate providers on appropriate billing practices. These audits occasionally result in recoupment of Medicare reimbursement. Similarly, private third-party payers may be successful in negotiating reduced reimbursement schedules for our services. Fixed fee schedules, capitation payment arrangements, exclusion from participation in or inability to reach agreements with private insurance organizations or government funded programs, reduction or elimination of payments or an increase in the payments at a rate that is less than the increase in our costs, or other factors affecting payments for healthcare services over which we have no control could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition. Further, we cannot assure you that our services will be considered cost-effective by third-party payers, that reimbursement will continue to be available, or that changes to third-party payer reimbursement policies will not have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell our services on a profitable basis, if at all.

Previous wording

Changes to Medicare rates or methods governing Medicare payments for our services could materially adversely affect our business.

Current wording

Changes to Medicare and Medicaid rates or methods governing Medicare and Medicaid payments for our services could materially adversely affect our business.

Previous wording

We derive substantial revenue from Medicare for our adult home health and hospice services. Reductions in Medicare rates or changes in the way Medicare pays for services could cause our revenue for these services to decline, perhaps materially. Reductions in Medicare reimbursement could be caused by many factors, including:

Current wording

We derive substantial revenue from Medicare for our adult home health and hospice services and Medicaid for our pediatric service offerings, including Private Duty Nursing. Reductions in Medicare and Medicaid rates or changes in the way Medicare and Medicaid pay for services could cause our revenue for these services to decline, perhaps materially. Reductions in Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement could be caused by many factors, including:

Previous wording

the imposition or increase by Medicare of mechanisms shifting more responsibility for a portion of payment to beneficiaries, such as co-payments;

Current wording

the imposition or increase by Medicare or Medicaid of mechanisms shifting more responsibility for a portion of payment to beneficiaries, such as co-payments;

Previous wording

Also, beginning on April 1, 2013, Medicare reimbursement was cut an additional 2% through sequestration as mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2011. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (the “CARES Act”), the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and the Act to Prevent Across-the-Board Direct Spending Cuts suspended the 2% sequestration mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the American Relief Act of 2011 through December 31, 2021. In December 2021, Congress extended the suspension of the automatic 2% reduction through March 2022 and reduced the sequestration adjustment to 1% beginning on April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022, with the full 2% reduction for sequestration resuming thereafter. Further, Medicare routinely reclassifies home health resource groups. As a result of those reclassifications, we could receive lower reimbursement rates depending on the case mix of the patients we service. If our cost of providing services increases by more than the annual Medicare price adjustment, or if these reclassifications result in lower reimbursement rates, our results of operations, net income and cash flows could be adversely impacted.

Current wording

Also, beginning on April 1, 2013, Medicare reimbursement was cut an additional 2% through sequestration as mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2011. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (the “CARES Act”), the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and the Act to Prevent Across-the-Board Direct Spending Cuts suspended the 2% sequestration mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011 and the American Relief Act of 2011 through December 31, 2021. In December 2021, Congress extended the suspension of the automatic 2% reduction through March 2022 and reduced the sequestration adjustment to 1% beginning on April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2022, with the full 2% reduction for sequestration resuming on July 1, 2022. Further, Medicare routinely reclassifies home health resource groups. As a result of those reclassifications, we could receive lower reimbursement rates depending on the case mix of the patients we service. If our cost of providing services increases by more than the annual Medicare price adjustment, or if these reclassifications result in lower reimbursement rates, our results of operations, net income and cash flows could be adversely impacted.

Previous wording

Additionally, CMS changed the HHPPS case-mix adjustment methodology through the use of a new PDGM for home health payments. This change was implemented on January 1, 2020, and also includes a change in the unit of payment from a 60-day payment period to a 30-day payment period and eliminates the use of therapy visits in the determination of payments. While the changes are intended to be implemented in a budget-neutral manner to the industry, the ultimate impact will vary by provider based on factors including patient mix and admission source. Additionally, in arriving at the calculation of a rate that is budget-neutral, CMS has made numerous assumptions about behavioral changes. The application of these assumptions could negatively impact our rates of reimbursement and have a material adverse effect on our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Current wording

Additionally, CMS changed the Home Health Prospective Payment System ("HHPPS") case-mix adjustment methodology through the use of a new PDGM for home health payments. This change was implemented on January 1, 2020, and also includes a change in the unit of payment from a 60-day payment period to a 30-day payment period and eliminates the use of therapy visits in the determination of payments. While the changes are intended to be implemented in a budget-neutral manner to the industry, the ultimate impact will vary by provider based on factors including patient mix and admission source. Additionally, in arriving at the calculation of a rate that is budget-neutral, CMS has made numerous assumptions about behavioral changes. The application of these assumptions could negatively impact our rates of reimbursement and have a material adverse effect on our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Previous wording

In June 2019, CMS implemented the Review Choice Demonstration ("RCD") Project for home health providers who submit claims to Palmetto GBA Medicare Administrative Contractor, specifically home health providers in Illinois, Ohio, Texas, North Carolina, and Florida. On September 1, 2021, CMS mandated participation for North Carolina and Florida providers. The Demonstration Project runs in six-month cycles until July 31, 2024, and is intended to reduce the number of Medicare appeals, and improve provider compliance with Medicare program requirements. Upon initiation of RCD or Cycle 1, HHAs had three initial choices; pre-claim review of 100% of claims; post-payment review; or minimal post-payment review with a 25% payment reduction. HHAs must have met a 90% target full provisional affirmation rate based on a minimum 10 requests/claims submitted to have successfully completed Cycle 1. For those HHAs who met the target affirmation rate and demonstrated compliance with certain Medicare rules, an additional review option of 5% Spot Check Review was available to choose for subsequent Cycles 2-6. Our home health business in the states of Florida and North Carolina are subject to the requirements of the RCD Project. These states recently finished Cycle 4-5 of the six total cycles and Cycle 6 began on January 1, 2024. If we do not comply with the requirements of the RCD Project we are at risk for significant advance payment or post-payment reviews and our reimbursement from the Medicare program could be delayed or reduced, thereby adversely impacting our results of operations, net income and cash flows. Additionally, states participating in the RCD Project are excluded from certain other CMS Audits referenced above.

Current wording

In June 2019, CMS implemented the Review Choice Demonstration ("RCD") for home health providers who submit claims to Palmetto GBA Medicare Administrative Contractor, specifically home health providers in Illinois, Ohio, Texas, North Carolina, and Florida. On September 1, 2021, CMS mandated participation for North Carolina and Florida providers. The Demonstration Project runs in six-month cycles until May 31, 2029, and is intended to reduce the number of Medicare appeals, and improve provider compliance with Medicare program requirements. Upon initiation of RCD, HHAs had three initial choices; pre-claim review of 100% of claims; post-payment review; or minimal post-payment review with a 25% payment reduction. HHAs must have met a 90% target full provisional affirmation rate based on a minimum 10 requests/claims submitted to have successfully completed Cycle 1. For those HHAs who met the target affirmation rate and demonstrated compliance with certain Medicare rules, an additional review option of 5% Spot Check Review was available to choose for subsequent cycles. Our home health business in the states of Florida and North Carolina are subject to the requirements of the RCD. If we do not comply with the requirements of the RCD, we are at risk for significant advance payment or post-payment reviews and our reimbursement from the Medicare program could be delayed or reduced, thereby adversely impacting our results of operations, net income and cash flows. Additionally, states participating in the RCD are excluded from certain other CMS Audits referenced above.

Previous wording

The Consolidated Appropriations Act passed by Congress at the end of 2022 (also referred to as the “Omnibus Budget Bill”) contained several provisions that could impact our business. As to budget enforcement rules previously enacted by Congress, Section 1001 of the Omnibus Budget Bill waives Statutory Pay-As-You-Go (S-PAYGO) for two years through December 31, 2024. The S-PAYGO 4% mandatory sequestration of Medicare benefit payments that previously would have become effective on January 1, 2023 has now been delayed until January 1, 2025. Additionally, Section 4163 of the Omnibus Budget Bill extended the current Budget Control Act (BCA) mandatory sequestration of 2% of Medicare benefits through the first six (6) months of 2023 and revised the sequestration percentages for fiscal years 2030 through 2032 to 2%.

Current wording

The Consolidated Appropriations Act passed by Congress at the end of 2022 (also referred to as the “Omnibus Budget Bill”) contained several provisions that could impact our business. As to budget enforcement rules previously enacted by Congress, Section 1001 of the Omnibus Budget Bill waives Statutory Pay-As-You-Go (S-PAYGO) for two years through December 31, 2024. The S-PAYGO 4% mandatory sequestration of Medicare benefit payments that previously would have become effective on January 1, 2023 has now become effective January 1, 2025. Additionally, Section 4163 of the Omnibus Budget Bill extended the current Budget Control Act (BCA) mandatory sequestration of 2% of Medicare benefits through the first six (6) months of 2023 and revised the sequestration percentages for fiscal years 2030 through 2032 to 2%.

Previous wording

While we will make every effort to mitigate the impact of behavioral adjustments in 2024, we cannot assure you that implementation and application of the remaining 2.89% behavioral adjustment (reduction) beginning on January 1, 2024 will not have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

While we will make every effort to mitigate the impact of reduction adjustments in 2025, we cannot assure you that implementation and application of any other reduction adjustment beginning on January 1, 2025 will not have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

The healthcare industry in general is facing uncertainty associated with the efforts to identify and implement alternative delivery payment models and workable coordinated care. Many government and commercial payers are transitioning providers to alternative payment models that are designed to promote cost-efficiency, quality and coordination of care. For example, accountable care organizations (“ACOs”) incentivize hospitals, physician groups, and other providers to organize and coordinate patient care while reducing unnecessary costs. Conceptually, ACOs receive a portion of any savings generated above a certain threshold from care coordination as long as benchmarks for the quality of care are maintained. Providers are then paid based on the overall value and quality (as determined by outcomes) of the services they provide to a patient rather than the number of services they provide. Pursuant to the ACA, CMS has established several separate ACO programs, the largest of which is the Medicare Shared Savings Program (“MSSP”). CMS established the MSSP to facilitate coordination and cooperation among providers to improve the quality of care for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries and to reduce costs. Eligible providers, hospitals and suppliers may participate in the MSSP by creating, participating in or contracting with an ACO. The ACO rules adopted by CMS are extremely complex and remain subject to further refinement by CMS. According to CMS, 480 MSSP ACOs served over 13 million patients as of January 1, 2024. Beginning on January 1, 2023, CMS transitioned to the Accountable Care Organization Realizing Equity, Access and Community Health (“REACH”) Model, requiring ACO participants to meet several provisions on promoting health equity, including the creation of a health equity plan. If we are not included in these programs, or if ACOs establish programs that overlap with our services, we are at risk for losing market share, including a loss of our current business. Other alternative payment models may be presented by the government and commercial payers to control costs that subject our company to financial risk. Broad-based implementation of a new delivery payment model would represent a significant transformation for us and the healthcare industry generally. The development of new delivery and payment systems will almost certainly take significant time and expense. We cannot predict at this time what effect alternative payment models may have on our company.

Current wording

The healthcare industry in general is facing uncertainty associated with the efforts to identify and implement alternative delivery payment models and workable coordinated care. Many government and commercial payers are transitioning providers to alternative payment models that are designed to promote cost-efficiency, quality and coordination of care. For example, an accountable care organization (“ACO”) incentivizes hospitals, physician groups, and other providers to organize and coordinate patient care while reducing unnecessary costs. Conceptually, ACOs receive a portion of any savings generated above a certain threshold from care coordination as long as benchmarks for the quality of care are maintained. Providers are then paid based on the overall value and quality (as determined by outcomes) of the services they provide to a patient rather than the number of services they provide. Pursuant to the ACA, CMS has established several separate ACO programs, the largest of which is the Medicare Shared Savings Program (“MSSP”). CMS established the MSSP to facilitate coordination and cooperation among providers to improve the quality of care for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries and to reduce costs. Eligible providers, hospitals and suppliers may participate in the MSSP by creating, participating in or contracting with an ACO. The ACO rules adopted by CMS are extremely complex and remain subject to further refinement by CMS. According to CMS, 480 MSSP ACOs served over 13 million patients as of January 1, 2024. Beginning on January 1, 2023, CMS transitioned to the Accountable Care Organization Realizing Equity, Access and Community Health (“REACH”) Model, requiring ACO participants to meet several provisions on promoting health equity, including the creation of a health equity plan. If we are not included in these programs, or if ACOs establish programs that overlap with our services, we are at risk for losing market share, including a loss of our current business. Other alternative payment models may be presented by the government and commercial payers to control costs that subject our company to financial risk. Broad-based implementation of a new delivery payment model would represent a significant transformation for us and the healthcare industry generally. The development of new delivery and payment systems will almost certainly take significant time and expense. We cannot predict at this time what effect alternative payment models may have on our company.

Previous wording

We may be similarly impacted by increased enrollment of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care plans, shifting away from traditional fee-for-service models. Under a managed Medicare plan, also known as Medicare Advantage, the federal government contracts with private health insurers to provide Medicare benefits and the insurers may choose to offer supplemental benefits. Approximately 51% of all Medicare beneficiaries were enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan in 2023, a figure that continues to grow. Beginning in 2019, CMS allowed Medicare Advantage plans to offer certain personal care services as a supplemental benefit. Enrollment in managed Medicaid plans is also growing, as states are increasingly relying on managed care organizations to deliver Medicaid program services as a strategy to control costs and manage resources. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in our efforts to be included in managed plan networks, that we will be able to secure favorable contracts with all or some of the managed care organizations, that our reimbursement under these programs will remain at current levels, that the authorizations for services will remain at current levels or that our profitability will remain at levels consistent with past performance. We may also face increased competition for managed care contracts as a result of state regulation and limitations. In addition, operational processes may not be well-defined as a state transitions Medicaid recipients to managed care. For example, membership, new referrals and the related authorization for services to be provided may be delayed, which may result in delays in service delivery to consumers or in payment for services rendered. Difficulties with operational processes associated with new managed care contracts may negatively affect our revenue growth rates, cash flow and profitability for services provided.

Current wording

We may be similarly impacted by increased enrollment of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care plans, shifting away from traditional fee-for-service models. Under a managed Medicare plan, also known as Medicare Advantage, the federal government contracts with private health insurers to provide Medicare benefits and the insurers may choose to offer supplemental benefits. Approximately 54% of all Medicare beneficiaries were enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan in 2024, a figure that continues to grow. Enrollment in managed Medicaid plans is also growing, as states are increasingly relying on managed care organizations to deliver Medicaid program services as a strategy to control costs and manage resources. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in our efforts to be included in managed plan networks, that we will be able to secure favorable contracts with all or some of the managed care organizations, that our reimbursement under these programs will remain at current levels, that the authorizations for services will remain at current levels or that our profitability will remain at levels consistent with past performance. We may also face increased competition for managed care contracts as a result of state regulation and limitations. In addition, operational processes may not be well-defined as a state transitions Medicaid recipients to managed care. For example, membership, new referrals and the related authorization for services to be provided may be delayed, which may result in delays in service delivery to consumers or in payment for services rendered. Difficulties with operational processes associated with new managed care contracts may negatively affect our revenue growth rates, cash flow and profitability for services provided.

Previous wording

Delays in collection or non-collection of our patient accounts receivable, or recoupment of payments previously received, particularly during the business integration process, or during system transitions, or in connection with complying with EVV data collection and submission requirements, could adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Current wording

Delays in collection or non-collection of our patient accounts receivable, or recoupment of payments previously received, particularly during the business integration process, or during system transitions, or in connection with complying with Electronic Visit Verification ("EVV") data collection and submission requirements, could adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Previous wording

Prompt billing and collection are important factors in our liquidity and our business is characterized by delays from the time we provide services to the time we receive payment for these services. We bill numerous and varied payers, such as Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance payers. These different payers typically have different billing requirements that must be satisfied prior to receiving payment for services rendered. Reimbursement is typically conditioned on our documenting medical necessity and correctly applying diagnosis codes. Incorrect or incomplete documentation and billing information could result in non-payment for services rendered. Billing and collection of our patient accounts receivable with Medicare and Medicaid are further subject to the complex regulations that govern Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, and to rules imposed by nongovernment payers. For example, recent efforts have focused on improved coordination of regulation across the various types of Medicaid programs through which personal care services are offered. The 21st Century Cures Act, as amended, mandated that states implement EVV, which is used to collect home visit data, such as when the visit begins and ends. In several states, providers are now required to obtain state licenses or registrations and must comply with laws and regulations governing standards of practice. Providers must dedicate substantial resources to ensure continuing compliance with all applicable regulations and significant expenditures may be necessary to offer new services or to expand into new markets. The failure to comply with regulatory requirements could lead to the termination of rights to participate in federal and state-sponsored programs, repayment of payments previously received, and the suspension or revocation of licenses. We believe new licensing requirements and regulations, including EVV, the increasing focus on improving health outcomes, the rising cost and complexity of operations, technology and pressure on reimbursement rates due to constrained government resources may discourage new providers and may encourage industry consolidation. Further, states that fail to meet federally imposed EVV deadlines could potentially lose, without an application for a good cause extension, an escalating amount of their funding. Each state has different timelines and methodologies, including the data aggregators and processors used by each state, for implementing respective EVV process requirements. In order to comply with current and future state and federal regulations around EVV use, we utilize several different vendors. In states with an “open” model, the payer is able to choose its preferred EVV vendor. In states mandating the EVV vendor, a “closed” system, we utilize whichever vendor the state has mandated. In both cases, we have built interfaces between the EVV vendor and our clinical scheduling, documentation, and billing systems utilized in the respective branch and corpo…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

Prompt billing and collection are important factors in our liquidity and our business is characterized by delays from the time we provide services to the time we receive payment for these services. We bill numerous and varied payers, such as Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance payers. These different payers typically have different billing requirements that must be satisfied prior to receiving payment for services rendered. Reimbursement is typically conditioned on our documenting medical necessity and correctly applying diagnosis codes. Incorrect or incomplete documentation and billing information could result in non-payment for services rendered. Billing and collection of our patient accounts receivable with Medicare and Medicaid are further subject to the complex regulations that govern Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, and to rules imposed by nongovernment payers. For example, recent efforts have focused on improved coordination of regulation across the various types of Medicaid programs through which personal care services are offered. The 21st Century Cures Act, as amended, mandated that states implement EVV, a technology that collects and verifies data that home services are rendered, such as when the visit begins and ends. In several states, providers are now required to obtain state licenses or registrations and must comply with laws and regulations governing standards of practice. Providers must dedicate substantial resources to ensure continuing compliance with all applicable regulations and significant expenditures may be necessary to offer new services or to expand into new markets. The failure to comply with regulatory requirements could lead to the termination of rights to participate in federal and state-sponsored programs, repayment of payments previously received, and the suspension or revocation of licenses. We believe new licensing requirements and regulations, including EVV, the increasing focus on improving health outcomes, the rising cost and complexity of operations, technology and pressure on reimbursement rates due to constrained government resources may discourage new providers and may encourage industry consolidation. Further, states that fail to meet federally imposed EVV deadlines could potentially lose, without an application for a good cause extension, an escalating amount of their funding. Each state has different timelines and methodologies, including the data aggregators and processors used by each state, for implementing respective EVV process requirements. In order to comply with current and future state and federal regulations around EVV use, we utilize several different vendors. In states with an “open” model, the payer is able to choose its preferred EVV vendor. In states mandating the EVV vendor, a “closed” system, we utilize whichever vendor the state has mandated. In both cases, we have built interfaces between the EVV vendor and our clinical scheduling, documentation, and billing systems utilize…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Threats to our information technology systems and data security can take a variety of forms. Hackers may develop and deploy viruses, worms and other malicious software programs that attack our networks and data centers or those of our service providers. Additionally, unauthorized parties may attempt to gain access to our systems or facilities, or those of third parties with whom we do business, through fraud, trickery, or other forms of deceiving our employees or contractors, direct social engineering, phishing, credential stuffing, ransomware, denial or degradation of service attacks and similar types of attacks against any or all of us, our patients and our service providers. Other threats include inadvertent security breaches or theft, misuse, unauthorized access or other improper actions by our employees, patients, service providers and other business partners. Cybersecurity attacks and other security-related incidents are increasing in frequency and evolving in nature.

Current wording

Threats to our information technology systems and data security can take a variety of forms. Hackers may develop and deploy viruses, worms and other malicious software programs that attack our networks and data centers or those of our service providers. Additionally, unauthorized parties may attempt to gain access to our systems or facilities, or those of third parties with whom we do business, through fraud, trickery, or other forms of deceiving our employees or contractors, direct social engineering, phishing, credential stuffing, ransomware, denial or degradation of service attacks and similar types of attacks against any or all of us, our patients and our service providers. Other threats include inadvertent security breaches or theft, misuse, unauthorized access or other improper actions by our employees, patients, service providers and other business partners. Cybersecurity attacks and other security-related incidents are increasing in frequency and evolving in nature. Such attacks also may be further enhanced in frequency or effectiveness through threat actors’ use of artificial intelligence.

Previous wording

We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of cybersecurity attacks and security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by breaches, including unauthorized access to patient data and personally identifiable information stored in our information systems, the introduction of computer viruses or other malicious software programs to our systems, cybersecurity attacks, email phishing schemes, network disruption, denial of service attacks, malware and ransomware. A cybersecurity attack or other incident that bypasses our, our patients’ or third-party service providers’ information system’s security, or the information system’s security of vendors or counterparties to our patients’ or third-party service providers, could cause a security breach that may lead to a material disruption to our information systems infrastructure or business and may involve a significant loss of business or patient health information and other confidential, sensitive or personal information. If a cybersecurity attack or other unauthorized attempt to access our systems or facilities, or those of our patients or third-party service providers, directly or indirectly, were to be successful, it could result in the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of confidential, sensitive or personal information or intellectual property, and could cause operational or business delays that may materially impact our ability to provide various healthcare services. Any successful cybersecurity attack or other unauthorized attempt to access our systems or facilities, or those of our patients or third-party service providers, also could result in negative publicity which could damage our reputation or brand with our patients, referral sources, payers or other third parties and could subject us to substantial sanctions, fines and damages and other additional civil and criminal penalties under HIPAA, the HITECH Act, the HIPAA Omnibus Rule (the “Omnibus Rule”) and other federal and state privacy laws, in addition to litigation with those affected.

Current wording

We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of cybersecurity attacks and security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by breaches, including unauthorized access to patient data and personally identifiable information stored in our information systems, the introduction of computer viruses or other malicious software programs to our systems, cybersecurity attacks, email phishing schemes, network disruption, denial of service attacks, malware and ransomware. A cybersecurity attack or other incident that bypasses our, our patients’ or third-party service providers’ information system’s security, or the information system’s security of vendors or counterparties to our patients’ or third-party service providers, could cause a security breach that may lead to a material disruption to our information systems infrastructure or business and may involve a significant loss of business or patient health information and other confidential, sensitive or personal information. If a cybersecurity attack or other unauthorized attempt to access our systems or facilities, or those of our patients or third-party service providers, directly or indirectly, were to be successful, it could result in the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of confidential, sensitive or personal information or intellectual property, and could cause operational or business delays that may materially impact our ability to provide various healthcare services. Any successful cybersecurity attack or other unauthorized attempt to access our systems or facilities, or those of our patients or third-party service providers, also could result in negative publicity which could damage our reputation or brand with our patients, referral sources, payers or other third parties and could subject us to substantial sanctions, fines and damages and other additional civil and criminal penalties under HIPAA and other federal and state privacy laws, in addition to litigation with those affected.

Previous wording

Failure to maintain the security and functionality of our information systems and related software, or to defend a cybersecurity attack or other attempt to gain unauthorized access to our systems, facilities or patient health information could expose us to a number of adverse consequences, the vast majority of which are not insurable, including but not limited to disruptions in our operations, regulatory and other civil and criminal penalties, fines, investigations and enforcement actions (including, but not limited to, those arising from the SEC, Federal Trade Commission, the HHS Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) or State Attorneys General), litigation with those affected by the data breach, loss of patients, disputes with payers and increased operating expense, which either individually or in the aggregate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Current wording

We, our patients, and our third-party service providers have been the victims of these types of threats, attacks and security breaches in the past. Failure to maintain the security and functionality of our information systems and related software, or to defend a cybersecurity attack or other attempt to gain unauthorized access to our systems, facilities or patient health information could expose us to a number of adverse consequences, the vast majority of which are not insurable, including but not limited to disruptions in our operations, regulatory and other civil and criminal penalties, fines, investigations and enforcement actions (including, but not limited to, those arising from the SEC, Federal Trade Commission, the HHS Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) or State Attorneys General), litigation with those affected by the data breach, loss of patients, disputes with payers and increased operating expense, which either individually or in the aggregate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Previous wording

Changes in payment methodologies by third-party payers could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flow. On November 1, 2023, CMS released its final rule for fiscal year 2024 (the “2024 HH Rule”). With respect to Medicare reimbursement rates, the 2024 HH Rule implements a home health payment increase of 0.8%. This reflects a market basket increase of 3.3% and an outlier payment increase of 0.4% offset by a productivity adjustment of -0.3% and a PDGM behavioral assumption adjustment of -5.78%. CMS projects the overall impact of the -5.78% adjustment to be -2.89% as the adjustment is only made to the 30-day payment rate and not Low Utilization Payment Adjustment (LUPA) rates. Any future significant changes in CMS reimbursement methodology, or future decreases in reimbursement rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Current wording

Changes in payment methodologies by third-party payers could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flow. On November 7, 2024, CMS released its final rule for fiscal year 2025 (the “2025 HH Rule”). With respect to Medicare reimbursement rates, the 2025 HH Rule implements a home health payment increase of 0.5%. This reflects a market basket increase of 3.2% and an outlier payment increase of 0.4% offset by a productivity adjustment of -0.5% and a PDGM behavioral assumption adjustment of -1.8%. Any future significant changes in CMS reimbursement methodology, or future decreases in reimbursement rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Previous wording

Providing quality patient care is fundamental to our business. We believe that hospitals, physicians and other referral sources refer patients to us in large part because of our reputation for delivering quality care. Clinical quality is becoming increasingly important within our industry. Effective October 2012, Medicare began to impose a financial penalty upon hospitals that have excessive rates of patient readmissions within 30 days from hospital discharge. We believe this regulation provides a competitive advantage to home health providers who can differentiate themselves based upon quality, particularly by achieving low patient acute care hospitalization readmission rates and by implementing disease management programs designed to be responsive to the needs of patients served by referring hospitals. We are focused intently upon improving our patient outcomes, particularly our patient acute care hospitalization readmission rates. If we should fail to attain our goals regarding acute care hospitalization readmission rates and other quality metrics, we expect our ability to generate referrals would be adversely impacted, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Additionally, Medicare has established consumer-facing websites, Home Health Compare and Hospice Compare, that present data regarding our performance on certain quality measures compared to state and national averages. If we should fail to achieve or exceed these averages, it may affect our ability to generate referrals, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Current wording

Providing quality patient care is fundamental to our business. We believe that hospitals, physicians and other referral sources refer patients to us in large part because of our reputation for delivering quality care. Clinical quality is becoming increasingly important within our industry. Effective October 2012, Medicare imposed a financial penalty upon hospitals that have excessive rates of patient readmissions within 30 days from hospital discharge. We believe this regulation provides a competitive advantage to home health providers who can differentiate themselves based upon quality, particularly by achieving low patient acute care hospitalization readmission rates and by implementing disease management programs designed to be responsive to the needs of patients served by referring hospitals. We are focused intently upon improving our patient outcomes, particularly our patient acute care hospitalization readmission rates. If we should fail to attain our goals regarding acute care hospitalization readmission rates and other quality metrics, we expect our ability to generate referrals would be adversely impacted, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Additionally, Medicare has established consumer-facing websites, Home Health Compare and Hospice Compare, that present data regarding our performance on certain quality measures compared to state and national averages. If we should fail to achieve or exceed these averages, it may affect our ability to generate referrals, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Previous wording

Additionally, CMS initiated the Value Based Purchasing Demonstration (VBP) Project for nine states, including Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington in 2016 for the purpose of using Medicare data to provide greater transparency on quality in order to deliver care based on value over volume. Data is pulled from OASIS, Medicare claims data and patient satisfaction scores. The Demonstration Project ended in December 2022 and effective January 1, 2023, CMS expanded VBP nationally to all providers. HHA performance in 2024 will determine payments in 2026.

Current wording

Additionally, CMS initiated the Value Based Purchasing Demonstration ("VBP") for nine states, including Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington in 2016 for the purpose of using Medicare data to provide greater transparency on quality in order to deliver care based on value over volume. Data is pulled from OASIS, Medicare claims data and patient satisfaction scores. The Demonstration Project ended in December 2022 and effective January 1, 2023, CMS expanded VBP nationally to all providers. HHA performance in 2025 will determine payments in 2027.

Previous wording

Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected by national public health emergencies including a resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic, variants of the virus, or other public health emergencies.

Current wording

Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected by national public health emergencies, such as a pandemic or other infectious disease outbreak.

Previous wording

The PHE associated with COVID-19 expired in May 2023. The extent to which a future COVID-19 outbreak could impact our business and operating results in the future depends on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be accurately predicted. The impacts of any future public health emergencies on our results of operations may include: decreased demand for our services; lower volumes of our services provided, includingdue to lack of availability of caregivers in the workforce; interruptions in the provision of our services, including due to the interruptionof the operations of our referral sources; increased costs of services in order to attract and retain qualified caregivers; increased costs necessary to comply with federal, state and local mandates and other regulations associated with any public health emergency; civil monetary penalties from CMS if we are unable to comply with vaccination requirements; and a reduction in our liquidity position, which may limit our ability to service our indebtedness and our future ability to incur additional indebtedness or financing. All of these possibilities could in the future have a material and adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

The extent to which a public health emergency, such as a pandemic or other infectious disease outbreak, could impact our business and operating results in the future depends on future developments that are highly uncertain and cannot be accurately predicted. The impacts of any future public health emergencies on our results of operations may include: decreased demand for our services; lower volumes of our services provided, including due to lack of availability of caregivers in the workforce; interruptions in the provision of our services, including due to the interruption of the operations of our referral sources; increased costs of services in order to attract and retain qualified caregivers; increased costs necessary to comply with federal, state and local mandates and other regulations associated with any public health emergency; and a reduction in our liquidity position, which may limit our ability to service our indebtedness and our future ability to incur additional indebtedness or financing. All of these possibilities could in the future have a material and adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Previous wording

If the demand for home health and/or hospice services continues to exceed the supply of available and qualified personnel, we and our competitors may be forced to offer higher compensation and other benefits to attract and retain them. Since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, we experienced increased caregiver recruitment and retention costs, including hiring and retention incentives, as well as higher base compensation rates as we passed reimbursement rate increases from our payers through to our caregivers. While the impacts on us of the COVID-19 pandemic began to subside in the second quarter of fiscal year 2022, the labor markets remained challenging as a result of both shortages in workforce and inflationary wage pressures, which have constrained our ability to recruit and retain caregivers to meet patient demand. For example, recruitment of qualified caregivers in our private duty services businesses is highly competitive. The majority of our HHH and PDN caregivers are LPN and we compete for this labor pool both with competitors in our private duty services industry as well as other healthcare organizations outside our industry, to include hospitals. Hospitals and other healthcare providers have expanded LPN utilization in their labor pools. Even if we were to offer higher compensation and other benefits, there can be no assurance that these individuals will choose to join or continue to work for us. In addition, if we expand our operations into geographic areas where healthcare providers historically have been unionized, or if any of our employees become unionized, being subject to a collective bargaining agreement may have a negative impact on our ability to timely and successfully recruit qualified personnel and may increase our operating costs. We currently have no union employees, so an increase in labor union activity could have a significant impact on our labor costs. Furthermore, the competitive market for this labor force has created turnover as many seek to take advantage of the supply of available positions, each offering new and more attractive wage and benefit packages. In addition to the wage pressures inherent in this environment, the cost of training new employees amid the turnover rates may cause added pressure on our operating results. If our labor costs continue to increase, we may not experience reimbursement rate or pricing increases to offset these additional costs. Our ability to pass along increased labor costs is limited, which could significantly affect our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Current wording

If the demand for home health and/or hospice services continues to exceed the supply of available and qualified personnel, we and our competitors may be forced to offer higher compensation and other benefits to attract and retain them. Since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, we experienced increased caregiver recruitment and retention costs, including hiring and retention incentives, as well as higher base compensation rates as we passed reimbursement rate increases from our payers through to our caregivers. While the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on us began to subside in the second quarter of fiscal year 2022, the labor markets remained challenging as a result of both shortages in workforce and inflationary wage pressures, which have constrained our ability to recruit and retain caregivers to meet patient demand. For example, recruitment of qualified caregivers in our private duty services businesses is highly competitive. The majority of our HHH and PDN caregivers are licensed practical nurses (“LPN”) and we compete for this labor pool both with competitors in our private duty services industry as well as other healthcare organizations outside our industry, including hospitals. Hospitals and other healthcare providers have expanded LPN utilization in their labor pools. Even if we were to offer higher compensation and other benefits, there can be no assurance that these individuals will choose to join or continue to work for us. In addition, if we expand our operations into geographic areas where healthcare providers historically have been unionized, or if any of our employees become unionized, being subject to a collective bargaining agreement may have a negative impact on our ability to timely and successfully recruit qualified personnel and may increase our operating costs. We currently have no union employees, so an increase in labor union activity could have a significant impact on our labor costs. Furthermore, the competitive market for this labor force has created turnover as many seek to take advantage of the supply of available positions, each offering new and more attractive wage and benefit packages. In addition to the wage pressures inherent in this environment, the cost of training new employees amid the turnover rates may cause added pressure on our operating results. If our labor costs continue to increase, we may not experience reimbursement rate or pricing increases to offset these additional costs. Our ability to pass along increased labor costs is limited, which could significantly affect our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Previous wording

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness. As of December 30, 2023, we had $1,470 million principal amount outstanding under our Senior Secured Credit Facilities (as defined below) as well as our Securitization Facility (as defined below) with approximately $168.1 million borrowing capacity under our Revolving Credit Facility (as defined below) as well as our Securitization Facility (as defined below).

Current wording

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness. As of December 28, 2024, we had $1,474 million principal amount outstanding under our Senior Secured Credit Facilities (as defined below) as well as our Securitization Facility (as defined below) with approximately $138.0 million borrowing capacity under our Revolving Credit Facility (as defined below) as well as our Securitization Facility (as defined below).

Previous wording

Our variable rate debt instruments are primarily indexed to the secured overnight financing rate (“SOFR”) and have a SOFR floor of 50 basis points. Our outstanding variable rate indebtedness at December 30, 2023 was $1,470 million. While we have interest caps and interest rate swap agreements currently in place that protect us from exposure to increases in SOFR above 2.96%, to the extent we incur variable rate debt in excess of aggregate notional amount of such instruments or are unable to obtain similar coverage following expiration of such instruments, we may be unable to mitigate our interest rate risk. The U.S. Federal Reserve Board significantly increased the federal funds rate in 2022 and 2023 to combat rising inflation in the United States, which has increased the borrowing costs on our variable rate debt and may increase the cost of any new debt we incur. Any further additional federal fund rate increases could in turn make our financing activities, including those related to our acquisition activity, more costly and limit our ability to refinance existing debt when it matures or pay higher interest rates upon refinancing and increase interest expense on refinanced indebtedness. If interest rates continue to increase, our debt service obligations on our variable rate indebtedness would likewise increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net income and cash flows, including cash available for servicing our indebtedness, would correspondingly decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our overall financial condition. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Indebtedness”.

Current wording

Our variable rate debt instruments are primarily indexed to the secured overnight financing rate (“SOFR”) and have a SOFR floor of 50 basis points. Our outstanding variable rate indebtedness at December 28, 2024 was $1,474 million. While we have interest caps and interest rate swap agreements currently in place that protect us from exposure to increases in SOFR above 2.96%, to the extent we incur variable rate debt in excess of aggregate notional amount of such instruments or are unable to obtain similar coverage following expiration of such instruments, we may be unable to mitigate our interest rate risk. Beginning in early 2022, in response to significant and prolonged increases in inflation, the U.S. Federal Reserve Board raised interest rates eleven times during 2022 and 2023, which has increased the borrowing costs on our variable rate debt. The Federal Reserve Board then paused rate increases in the fourth quarter of 2023 following the deceleration of inflationary growth. During that same period the European Central Bank and the Bank of England similarly raised interest rates and implemented fiscal policy interventions responsive to high levels of inflation and recession fears. The Federal Reserve Board cut interest rates in September 2024 and December 2024, and it may seek to further reduce interest rates,increase interest rates or maintain current interest rates. The timing, number and amount of any future interest rate changes are uncertain, and there can be no assurance that rates will continue to decrease at a rate currently predicted or at all, which would in turn negatively impact our borrowing costs. Any future additional federal fund rate increases could make our financing activities, including those related to our acquisition activity, more costly and limit our ability to refinance existing debt when it matures or pay higher interest rates upon refinancing and increase interest expense on refinanced indebtedness. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on our variable rate indebtedness would likewise increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net income and cash flows, including cash available for servicing our indebtedness, would correspondingly decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our overall financial condition. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Indebtedness”.

Previous wording

Changes in federal laws or regulations may materially adversely impact future acquisitions. For example, the Social Security Act provides the Secretary of HHS with the authority to impose temporary moratoria on the enrollment of new Medicare providers if deemed necessary to combat fraud, waste or abuse under government programs. While there are no active Medicare moratoria, there can be no assurance that CMS will not adopt a moratorium on new providers in the future. Additionally, in 2010, CMS implemented and amended a regulation known as the “36 Month Rule” that is applicable to home health agency acquisitions. Subject to certain exceptions, the 36 Month Rule prohibits buyers of certain home health agencies – those that either enrolled in Medicare or underwent a change in majority ownership fewer than 36 months prior to the acquisition – from assuming the Medicare billing privileges of the acquired branch locations. The 36 Month Rule may restrict bona fide transactions and potentially block new investments in home health agencies. These changes in federal laws and regulations, and similar future changes, may further increase competition for acquisition targets and could have a material adverse effect on any acquisition strategy.

Current wording

Changes in federal laws or regulations may materially adversely impact future acquisitions. For example, the Social Security Act provides the Secretary of HHS with the authority to impose temporary moratoria on the enrollment of new Medicare providers if deemed necessary to combat fraud, waste or abuse under government programs. While there are no active Medicare moratoria, there can be no assurance that CMS will not adopt a moratorium on new providers in the future. Additionally, in 2010, CMS implemented and amended a regulation known as the “36 Month Rule” that is applicable to home health agency acquisitions. Subject to certain exceptions, the 36 Month Rule prohibits buyers of certain home health agencies – those that either enrolled in Medicare or underwent a change in majority ownership fewer than 36 months prior to the acquisition – from assuming the Medicare billing privileges of the acquired branch locations. In 2023, CMS extended the 36 Month Rule to apply to hospices. The 36 Month Rule may restrict bona fide transactions and potentially block new investments in home health agencies. These changes in federal laws and regulations, and similar future changes, may further increase competition for acquisition targets and could have a material adverse effect on any acquisition strategy.

Previous wording

We are a party to lawsuits, claims and governmental inquiries in the normal course of our business. See Note 13 –Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Current wording

We are a party to lawsuits, claims and governmental inquiries in the normal course of our business. See Note 13 –Commitments and Contingencies to the audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (the "Consolidated Financial Statements").

Previous wording

Our balance sheet includes a significant amount of goodwill and intangible assets. Goodwill and intangible assets, net, together accounted for approximately 71% of total assets on our balance sheet as of December 30, 2023. The impairment of a significant portion of these assets would negatively affect our financial condition or results of operations. We regularly evaluate whether events and circumstances have occurred indicating that any portion of our intangible assets and goodwill may not be recoverable. When factors indicate that intangible assets and goodwill should be evaluated for possible impairment, we may be required to reduce the carrying value of these assets. During fiscal year 2022, we performed an interim impairment assessment as of July 2, 2022. Based on that assessment, we determined the carrying value of five of our six reporting units across our three segments exceeded their respective fair values and accordingly recorded an aggregate goodwill impairment charge of $470.2 million during the three-month period ended July 2, 2022. During our annual goodwill impairment assessment during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022, we determined that the carrying value of five of our six reporting units across our three segments exceeded their respective fair values, and accordingly, recorded an aggregate goodwill impairment charge of $205.1 million during the three-month period ended December 31, 2022. During fiscal year 2023, we performed an interim impairment assessment as of September 30, 2023. We identified that the carrying value of the HHH reporting unit exceeded its estimated fair value. As such, we determined that the goodwill associated with the reporting unit was impaired and recorded an impairment charge, net of tax effect, of approximately $105.1 million to reduce goodwill associated with the reporting unit. No additional impairment was taken during our annual impairment assessment during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2023. We cannot currently estimate the timing and amount of any future reductions in carrying value.

Current wording

Our balance sheet includes a significant amount of goodwill and intangible assets. Goodwill and intangible assets, net, together accounted for approximately 69% of total assets on our balance sheet as of December 28, 2024. The impairment of a significant portion of these assets would negatively affect our financial condition or results of operations. We regularly evaluate whether events and circumstances have occurred indicating that any portion of our intangible assets and goodwill may not be recoverable. When factors indicate that intangible assets and goodwill should be evaluated for possible impairment, we may be required to reduce the carrying value of these assets. During fiscal year 2023, we performed an interim impairment assessment as of September 30, 2023. We identified that the carrying value of the HHH reporting unit exceeded its estimated fair value. As such, we determined that the goodwill associated with the reporting unit was impaired and recorded an impairment charge, net of tax effect, of approximately $105.1 million to reduce goodwill associated with the reporting unit. No additional impairment was taken during our annual impairment assessment during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2023, and no impairment expense was recognized during our annual impairment assessment during fiscal year 2024. We cannot currently estimate the timing and amount of any future reductions in carrying value.

Previous wording

In general, under Section 382 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change” is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change net operating losses (“NOLs”) and interest expense carryovers to offset future taxable income. A Section 382 “ownership change” generally occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of our stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. As of December 30, 2023, we had $21.2 million of U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards and $380.1 million of state and local net operating loss carryforwards. In addition, as of December 30, 2023, we had an interest expense carryover of $339.0 million for federal purposes and in some states. Our ability to utilize NOLs and our interest expense carryovers may be currently subject to limitations due to prior ownership changes. In addition, future changes in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control, could result in an ownership change under Section 382 of the Code, further limiting our ability to utilize NOLs or interest expense carryovers arising prior to such ownership change in the future. There is also a risk that due to statutory or regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. We have recorded a full valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets attributable to our federal and certain state NOLs and interest carryovers.

Current wording

In general, under Section 382 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), a corporation that undergoes an “ownership change” is subject to limitations on its ability to utilize its pre-change net operating losses (“NOLs”) and interest expense carryovers to offset future taxable income. A Section 382 “ownership change” generally occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of our stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. As of December 28, 2024, we had $0.3 million of U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards and $366.4 million of state and local net operating loss carryforwards. In addition, as of December 28, 2024, we had an interest expense carryover of $343.3 million for federal purposes and in some states. Our ability to utilize NOLs and our interest expense carryovers may be currently subject to limitations due to prior ownership changes. In addition, future changes in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control, could result in an ownership change under Section 382 of the Code, further limiting our ability to utilize NOLs or interest expense carryovers arising prior to such ownership change in the future. There is also a risk that due to statutory or regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. We have recorded a full valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets attributable to our federal and certain state NOLs and interest carryovers.

Previous wording

For hospice, the ACA required state Medicaid benefits for children to include hospice care with disease-modifying treatment. In addition, the ACA mandates the creation of a hospice quality reporting program, ensuring public reporting of hospice quality data. Hospices failing to submit quality data will incur a 2% reduction in hospice reimbursements for the following year. The ACA also requires a reduction in the market basket index, which beginning in 2013 is reduced by a productivity adjustment that fluctuates every year and an addition adjustment of 0.3%, reducing the Medicare hospice payment. These reductions in the market basket index came to an end in fiscal year 2021. For fiscal year 2024, CMS increased the hospice market basket rate by 3.3% and implemented a productivity adjustment of -0.2% resulting in a net hospice increase for fiscal year 2024 of 3.1%. For patients enrolled in hospice for more than six months, the ACA mandates a face-to-face visit with a physician or nurse practitioner to confirm continued need for hospice enrollment. Potential efforts in the U.S. Congress to repeal, amend, modify, or retract funding for various aspects of the ACA create additional uncertainty about the ultimate impact of the ACA on us and the healthcare industry.

Current wording

For hospice, the ACA required state Medicaid benefits for children to include hospice care with disease-modifying treatment. In addition, the ACA mandates the creation of a hospice quality reporting program, ensuring public reporting of hospice quality data. Hospices failing to submit quality data will incur a 2% reduction in hospice reimbursements for the following year. The ACA also requires a reduction in the market basket index, which beginning in 2013 is reduced by a productivity adjustment that fluctuates every year and an addition adjustment of 0.3%, reducing the Medicare hospice payment. These reductions in the market basket index came to an end in fiscal year 2021. For fiscal year 2025, CMS increased the hospice market basket rate by 3.4% and implemented a productivity adjustment of -0.5% resulting in a net hospice increase for fiscal year 2025 of 2.9%. For patients enrolled in hospice for more than six months, the ACA mandates a face-to-face visit with a physician or nurse practitioner to confirm continued need for hospice enrollment. Potential efforts in the U.S. Congress to repeal, amend, modify, or retract funding for various aspects of the ACA create additional uncertainty about the ultimate impact of the ACA on us and the healthcare industry.

Previous wording

Federal and state governments continue to pursue intensive enforcement policies resulting in a significant number of investigations, inspections, audits, citations of regulatory deficiencies, and other regulatory sanctions including demands for refund of overpayments, terminations from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, bans on Medicare and Medicaid payments for new admissions, and civil monetary penalties or criminal penalties. We expect audits under the CMS RAC program, the CMS TPE program, the UPIC program and other federal and state audits evaluating the medical necessity of services to further intensify the regulatory environment surrounding the healthcare industry as third-party firms engaged by CMS and others conduct extensive reviews of claims data and medical and other records to identify improper payments to healthcare providers under the Medicare and Medicaid programs. If we fail to comply with the extensive laws, regulations and prohibitions applicable to our businesses, we could become ineligible to receive government program reimbursement, suffer civil or criminal penalties, or be required to make significant changes to our operations. In addition, we could be forced to expend considerable resources responding to investigations, audits or other enforcement actions related to these laws, regulations or prohibitions. Failure of our staff to satisfy applicable licensure requirements, or of our home health and hospice operations to satisfy applicable licensure and certification requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Current wording

Federal and state governments continue to pursue intensive enforcement policies resulting in a significant number of investigations, inspections, audits, citations of regulatory deficiencies, and other regulatory sanctions including demands for refund of overpayments, terminations from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, bans on Medicare and Medicaid payments for new admissions, and civil monetary penalties or criminal penalties. We see the possibility of audits under the CMS RAC program, the CMS TPE program, the UPIC program and other federal and state audits evaluating the medical necessity of services to further intensify the regulatory environment surrounding the healthcare industry as third-party firms engaged by CMS and others conduct extensive reviews of claims data and medical and other records to identify improper payments to healthcare providers under the Medicare and Medicaid programs. If we fail to comply with the extensive laws, regulations and prohibitions applicable to our businesses, we could become ineligible to receive government program reimbursement, suffer civil or criminal penalties, or be required to make significant changes to our operations. In addition, we could be forced to expend considerable resources responding to investigations, audits or other enforcement actions related to these laws, regulations or prohibitions. Failure of our staff to satisfy applicable licensure requirements, or of our home health and hospice operations to satisfy applicable licensure and certification requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Previous wording

Many states have enacted CON or POA laws that require prior state approval to offer new or expanded healthcare services or open new healthcare facilities or expand services at existing facilities. In such states, expansion by existing providers or entry into the market by new providers is permitted only where a given amount of unmet need exists, resulting either from population increases or a reduction in competing providers. These states ration the entry of new providers or services and the expansion of existing providers or services in their markets through a CON or other approval process, which is periodically evaluated and updated as required by applicable state law. The process is intended to promote comprehensive healthcare planning, assist in providing high-quality healthcare at the lowest possible cost and avoid unnecessary duplication by ensuring that only those healthcare facilities, services and operations that are needed will be built and opened. We operate home health centers and/or hospice services in the following CON states: Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington. In every state where required, our home health offices, hospice centers and branch locations possess a license and/or CON issued by the state health authority that determines the local service areas for the home health office, hospice office or branch location.

Current wording

Many states have enacted CON or POA laws that require prior state approval to offer new or expanded healthcare services or open new healthcare facilities or expand services at existing facilities. In such states, expansion by existing providers or entry into the market by new providers is permitted only where a given amount of unmet need exists, resulting either from population increases or a reduction in competing providers. These states ration the entry of new providers or services and the expansion of existing providers or services in their markets through a CON, POA, or other approval process, which is periodically evaluated and updated as required by applicable state law. The process is intended to promote comprehensive healthcare planning, assist in providing high-quality healthcare at the lowest possible cost and avoid unnecessary duplication by ensuring that only those healthcare facilities, services and operations that are needed will be built and opened. We operate home health centers and/or hospice services in the following CON states: Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington. In every state where required, our home health offices, hospice centers and branch locations possess a license and/or CON issued by the state health authority that determines the local service areas for the home health office, hospice office or branch location.

Previous wording

In general, the process for opening a home health office, branch location or hospice begins by a provider submitting an application for licensure and certification to the state and federal regulatory bodies, and the completion of both an initial licensure and certification survey, which is followed by a testing period of transmitting data from the applicant to CMS. Once this process is complete, the provider receives a provider agreement and corresponding number and can begin billing for services that it provides unless a CON is required. For those states that require a CON, the provider must also complete a separate application process before billing can commence and receive required approvals for capital expenditures exceeding amounts above prescribed thresholds. Our costs of obtaining a CON in any new CON state in which we seek to operate could be significant, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain the CONs or other required approvals in the future. Our failure or inability to obtain a required CON, license or any necessary approvals could adversely affect our ability to expand into new markets and to expand our services and facilities in existing markets. Furthermore, if a CON or other prior approval upon which we relied to invest in a healthcare center or other facility were to be revoked or lost through an appeal process, we may not be able to recover the value of our investment.

Current wording

In general, the process for opening a home health office, branch location or hospice begins by a provider submitting an application for licensure and certification to the state and federal regulatory bodies, and the completion of both an initial licensure and certification survey, which is followed by a testing period of transmitting data from the applicant to CMS. Once this process is complete, the provider receives a provider agreement and corresponding number and can begin billing for services that it provides unless a CON is required. For those states that require a CON or POA, the provider must also complete a separate application process before billing can commence and receive required approvals for capital expenditures exceeding amounts above prescribed thresholds. Our costs of obtaining such approval could be significant, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain the CONs, POAs, or other required approvals in the future. Our failure or inability to obtain a required CON, POA, license or any other necessary approvals could adversely affect our ability to expand into new markets and to expand our services and facilities in existing markets. Furthermore, if a license, CON, POA, or other prior approval upon which we relied to invest in a healthcare center or other facility were to be revoked or lost through an appeal process, we may not be able to recover the value of our investment.

Previous wording

CMS and state Medicaid agencies may, for a period of time, impose a moratorium against additional Medicaid enrollment for a particular type of service, upon a determination that a moratorium is necessary to prevent fraud, waste or abuse, or to limit an over-abundance of a type of Medicaid provider within a state. For example, on July 31, 2013, CMS implemented a six-month moratorium on new Medicare (and Medicaid) home health agencies in Florida’s Miami-Dade County and Illinois’ Cook County. The moratorium on enrollment of additional home health agencies in the Medicare (and Medicaid programs) was a way to combat fraud, waste and abuse, while assuring patient access to care. Over the years, CMS has repeatedly renewed and extended the moratorium to the entire states of Florida, Illinois, Michigan and Texas.

Current wording

CMS and state Medicaid agencies may, for a period of time, impose a moratorium against additional Medicaid enrollment for a particular type of service, upon a determination that a moratorium is necessary to prevent fraud, waste or abuse, or to limit an over-abundance of a type of Medicaid provider within a state. For example, on July 31, 2013, CMS implemented a six-month moratorium on new Medicare (and Medicaid) home health agencies in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and Cook County, Illinois. The moratorium on enrollment of additional home health agencies in the Medicare (and Medicaid programs) was a way to combat fraud, waste and abuse, while assuring patient access to care. Over the years, CMS has repeatedly renewed and extended the moratorium to the entire states of Florida, Illinois, Michigan and Texas.

Previous wording

In addition, we, like other healthcare providers, are subject to ongoing investigations by the OIG, the United States DOJ and State Attorneys General into the billing of services provided to Medicare and Medicaid patients, including whether such services were properly documented and billed, whether services provided were medically necessary, and general compliance with conditions of participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Private pay sources such as third-party insurance and managed care entities also often reserve the right to conduct audits. Our costs to respond to and defend any such reviews, audits and investigations are significant and are likely to increase in the current enforcement environment. These audits and investigations may require us to refund or retroactively adjust amounts that have been paid under the relevant government program or from other payers. Further, an adverse review, audit or investigation could result in other adverse consequences, particularly if the underlying conduct is found to be pervasive or systemic. These consequences include: (1) state or federal agencies imposing significant fines, penalties and other sanctions on us; (2) loss of our right to participate in the Medicare or Medicaid programs or one or more third-party payer networks; (3) indemnity claims asserted by patients and others for which we provide services; and (4) damage to our reputation in various markets, which could adversely affect our ability to attract patients and employees. If they were to occur, these consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Current wording

In addition, we, like other healthcare providers, are subject to ongoing investigations by the OIG, DOJ, State Attorneys General, and other government agencies into the billing of services provided to Medicare and Medicaid patients, including whether such services were properly documented and billed, whether services provided were medically necessary, and general compliance with conditions of participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Private pay sources such as third-party insurance and managed care entities also often reserve the right to conduct audits. Our costs to respond to and defend any such reviews, audits and investigations are significant and are likely to increase in the current enforcement environment. These audits and investigations may require us to refund or retroactively adjust amounts that have been paid under the relevant government program or from other payers. Further, an adverse review, audit or investigation could result in other adverse consequences, particularly if the underlying conduct is found to be pervasive or systemic. These consequences include: (1) state or federal agencies imposing significant fines, penalties and other sanctions on us; (2) loss of our right to participate in the Medicare or Medicaid programs or one or more third-party payer networks; (3) indemnity claims asserted by patients and others for which we provide services; and (4) damage to our reputation in various markets, which could adversely affect our ability to attract patients and employees. If they were to occur, these consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Previous wording

On November 20, 2020, the OIG published its final rule revising the safe harbors to the Anti-Kickback Statute, aiming to reduce the regulatory barriers to care coordination and accelerate the transformation of the health care system into one that better pays for value and promotes care coordination. The OIG final rule implements seven new safe harbors and modifies four existing safe harbors. For example, the final rule clarifies how durable medical equipment companies may participate in protected care coordination arrangements involving digital health technology; modifies the existing safe harbor for personal services and management contracts to add flexibility for certain outcomes-based payments and part-time arrangements; expands and modifies mileage limits for local transportation for rural areas; and broadens the new safe harbor for cybersecurity technology and services to cover remuneration in the form of cybersecurity-related hardware. These revisions to the Anti-Kickback Statute safe harbors went into effect on January 19, 2021. While we endeavor to comply with the safe harbors, most of our current arrangements, including with physicians and other referral sources, may not qualify for safe harbor protection. Failure to qualify for a safe harbor does not mean the arrangement necessarily violates the Anti-Kickback Statute but may subject the arrangement to greater scrutiny. However, we cannot offer assurance that practices outside of a safe harbor will not be found to violate the Anti-Kickback Statute.

Current wording

While we endeavor to comply with the safe harbors, most of our current arrangements, including with physicians and other referral sources, may not qualify for safe harbor protection. Failure to qualify for a safe harbor does not mean the arrangement necessarily violates the Anti-Kickback Statute but may subject the arrangement to greater scrutiny. However, we cannot offer assurance that practices outside of a safe harbor will not be found to violate the Anti-Kickback Statute.

Previous wording

If we are found to have violated HIPAA, the HITECH Act, the Omnibus Rule or any other applicable privacy and security laws and regulations, as well as contractual obligations, we could be subject to sanctions, fines, damages and other additional civil or criminal penalties, which could increase our liabilities, harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operation and liquidity.

Current wording

If we are found to have violated HIPAA or any other applicable privacy and security laws and regulations, as well as contractual obligations, we could be subject to sanctions, fines, damages and other additional civil or criminal penalties, which could increase our liabilities, harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operation and liquidity.

Previous wording

The management of PHI is subject to several regulations at the federal level, including HIPAA and the HITECH Act. The HIPAA privacy and security regulations protect medical records and other personal health information by limiting their use and disclosure, giving individuals the right to access, amend, and seek accounting of their own health information, and limiting most uses and disclosures of health information to the minimum amount reasonably necessary to accomplish the intended purpose. The HITECH Act strengthened HIPAA enforcement provisions and authorized State Attorneys General to bring civil actions for HIPAA violations. It permits the HHS to conduct audits of HIPAA compliance and impose significant civil monetary penalties even if we did not know or reasonably could not have known about the violation. The Omnibus Rule extended certain privacy and security regulations to business associates and their subcontractors that handle protected health information and imposed new requirements on HIPAA business associate contracts. The Omnibus Rule also clarified a covered entity’s (which is a healthcare provider, a health plan or healthcare clearinghouse) notification and reporting requirements in the event of a breach of unsecured protected health information. This reporting obligation supplements state laws that also may require notification in the event of a breach of personal information. If we are found to have violated the HIPAA privacy or security regulations or other federal or state laws protecting the confidentiality of patient health or personal information, including but not limited to the HITECH Act and the Omnibus Rule, we could be subject to sanctions, fines, damages and other additional civil or criminal penalties, including litigation with those affected, which could increase our liabilities, harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Current wording

The management of PHI is subject to several regulations at the federal level, including HIPAA. The HIPAA privacy and security regulations protect medical records and other personal health information by limiting their use and disclosure, giving individuals the right to access, amend, and seek accounting of their own health information, and limiting most uses and disclosures of health information to the minimum amount reasonably necessary to accomplish the intended purpose. HIPAA also authorized State Attorneys General to bring civil actions for HIPAA violations. It permits the HHS to conduct audits of HIPAA compliance and impose significant civil monetary penalties even if we did not know or reasonably could not have known about the violation. The HIPAA privacy and security regulations are extended to business associates and their subcontractors that handle protected health information and imposed new requirements on HIPAA business associate contracts. The HIPAA reporting obligation supplements state laws that also may require notification in the event of a breach of personal information. If we are found to have violated the HIPAA privacy or security regulations or other federal or state laws protecting the confidentiality of patient health or personal information, we could be subject to sanctions, fines, damages and other additional civil or criminal penalties, including litigation with those affected, which could increase our liabilities, harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Previous wording

The federal government is also promoting the efficient exchange of electronic health information to improve health care. The 21st Century Cures Act prohibits information blocking by health care providers and certain other entities. Information blocking is defined as engaging in activities that are likely to interfere with, prevent or materially discourage access, exchange or use of electronic health information, subject to limited exceptions. Initiatives related to health care technology and interoperability may require changes to our operations, impose new and complex obligations on us, affect our relationships with other providers, vendors and other third parties and require investments in infrastructure. We may be subject to penalties for failure to comply.

Current wording

The federal government is also promoting the efficient exchange of electronic health information to improve health care. The 21st Century Cures Act prohibits information blocking by health care providers and certain other entities. Information blocking is defined as engaging in activities that are likely to interfere with, prevent or materially discourage access, exchange or use of electronic health information, subject to limited exceptions. Initiatives related to health care technology and interoperability may require changes to our operations, impose new and complex obligations on us, affect our relationships with other providers, vendors and other third parties and require investments in infrastructure, and we may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with these initiatives.

Previous wording

At the state and local level, there is increased focus on regulating the collection, storage, use, retention, security, disclosure, transfer and other processing of confidential, sensitive and personal information. In recent years, we have seen significant changes to data privacy regulations across the U.S., including the enactment of the CCPA, which went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates new consumer rights, and corresponding obligations on covered businesses, relating to the access to, deletion of and sharing of personal information collected by covered businesses, including a consumer’s right to opt out of certain sales of the consumer's personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches that result in the loss of personal information. This private right of action may increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. It remains unclear how various provisions of the CCPA will be interpreted and enforced. Additionally, California voters approved a new privacy law, the California Privacy Rights Act (the “CPRA”), in the November 3, 2020 election. Beginning on January 1, 2023, the CPRA significantly modified the CCPA, including by expanding consumers’ rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information. The CPRA also creates a new state agency that will be vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA and the CPRA. New legislation proposed or enacted in various other states will continue to shape the data privacy environment nationally. Certain state laws may be more stringent or broader in scope, or offer greater individual rights, with respect to confidential, sensitive and personal information than federal, international or other state laws, and such laws may differ from each other, which may complicate compliance efforts.

Current wording

At the state and local level, there is increased focus on regulating the collection, storage, use, retention, security, disclosure, transfer and other processing of confidential, sensitive and personal information. In recent years, we have seen significant changes to data privacy regulations across the U.S., including the enactment of the California Consumer Privacy Act ("CCPA"), which went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates new consumer rights, and corresponding obligations on covered businesses, relating to the access to, deletion of and sharing of personal information collected by covered businesses, including a consumer’s right to opt out of certain sales of the consumer's personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches that result in the loss of personal information. This private right of action may increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. It remains unclear how various provisions of the CCPA will be interpreted and enforced. Additionally, the California Privacy Rights Act (the “CPRA”) significantly modified the CCPA, including by expanding consumers’

Previous wording

Our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation (the “Amended Charter”) authorizes us to issue, without the approval of our stockholders, one or more classes or series of preferred stock having such designation, preferences, limitations and relative rights, including preferences over our common stock with respect to dividends and distributions, as our Board of Directors may determine. The terms of one or more classes or series of preferred stock could adversely impact the voting power or value of our common stock. For example, we might grant holders of preferred stock the right to elect some number of our directors in all events or on the happening of specified events or the right to veto specified transactions. Similarly, the repurchase or redemption rights or liquidation preferences we might assign to holders of preferred stock could affect the residual value of the common stock.

Current wording

Our Amended Charter authorizes us to issue, without the approval of our stockholders, one or more classes or series of preferred stock having such designation, preferences, limitations and relative rights, including preferences over our common stock with respect to dividends and distributions, as our Board of Directors may determine. The terms of one or more classes or series of preferred stock could adversely impact the voting power or value of our common stock. For example, we might grant holders of preferred stock the right to elect some number of our directors in all events or on the happening of specified events or the right to veto specified transactions. Similarly, the repurchase or redemption rights or liquidation preferences we might assign to holders of preferred stock could affect the residual value of the common stock.