ENSIGN GROUP, INC

Previous wording

•Changes to the U.S. healthcare system, including changes to the ACA or its regulations, new transparency and disclosure requirements, and federal and state standards for minimum nurse staffing levels, continue to impose new requirements upon us that could materially impact our business.

Current wording

•Changes to the U.S. healthcare system, both at a state and federal level, including recent regulations, new transparency and disclosure requirements, and potential spending levels, continue to impose new requirements upon us that could materially impact our business.

Previous wording

•Anticipated changes in the U.S. political environment, including those as a result of the change in Presidential administration and control of Congress, and to regulatory agencies, particularly HHS, may result in significant changes to the regulatory framework, enforcement, and reimbursements in our industry.

Current wording

•Anticipated changes in the U.S. political environment, including those as a result of the current Presidential administration and Congress, potential changes in control of one or both houses of Congress due to mid-term elections to occur in November 2026, and to regulatory agencies, particularly HHS, may result in significant changes to regulatory framework, enforcements, reimbursements and our business.

Previous wording

Reductions in Medicare reimbursements for physician and non-physician services could impact reimbursement for medical professionals.

Current wording

•Reductions in reimbursements for physician and non-physician services could impact reimbursement for medical professionals.

Previous wording

•Increased competition for, or a shortage of, nurses and other skilled personnel, could increase our staffing and labor costs and subject us to monetary fines resulting from a failure to maintain minimum staffing requirements, or may affect reimbursement.

Current wording

•Increased competition for, or a shortage of, nurses and other skilled personnel, could increase our staffing and labor costs and subject us to monetary fines resulting from a failure to maintain minimum staffing requirements under state law, or may affect reimbursement.

Previous wording

If we do not achieve or maintain competitive quality of care ratings from CMS or private organizations engaged in similar monitoring activities, our business may be negatively affected.

Current wording

•If we do not achieve or maintain competitive quality of care ratings from CMS or private organizations engaged in similar monitoring activities, which frequently change, our business may be negatively affected.

Previous wording

•We are a holding company with no operations and rely upon our multiple independent subsidiaries.

Current wording

•We are a holding company with no operations and rely upon our multiple independent subsidiaries to generate revenue.

Previous wording

•Standard Bearer's failure to qualify as a REIT may cause it to be subject to U.S. federal income tax. Additionally, legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on Standard Bearer.

Current wording

•Standard Bearer's failure to remain qualified as a REIT may cause it to be subject to U.S. federal income tax. Additionally, legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on Standard Bearer.

Previous wording

We derived 24.9% and 26.6% of our service revenue from the Medicare programs for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. In addition, many other payors may use published Medicare rates as a basis for reimbursements. Accordingly, if Medicare reimbursement rates are reduced or fail to increase as quickly as our costs, if there are changes in the rules governing the Medicare program that are disadvantageous to our business or industry, or if there are delays in Medicare payments, our business and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Current wording

We derived 23.7% and 24.9% of our service revenue from the Medicare programs for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. In addition, many other payors may use published Medicare rates as a basis for reimbursements. Accordingly, if Medicare reimbursement rates are reduced or fail to increase as quickly as our costs, if there are changes in the rules governing the Medicare program that are disadvantageous to our business or industry, or if there are delays in Medicare payments, our business and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Previous wording

•administrative or legislative changes to base rates or the bases for payment, including changes to the rates at which Medicare will reimburse services;

Current wording

•administrative or legislative changes to base rates or the bases for payment, including changes to the rates at which Medicare will reimburse services, including the imposition of, and periodic delay in imposing, reductions in reimbursement based on the sequestration of Medicare reimbursement;

Previous wording

Among the changes being implemented by CMS are provisions of the IMPACT Act, which imposes a stringent timeline for implementing benchmark quality measures and data metrics across facilities that include SNFs. The enactment mandates specific actions to design a unified payment methodology for post-acute providers, which CMS implements through ongoing regulations. The costs of final implementation may be significant, with potential fines and payment reductions resulting from a failure to meet CMS's implementation requirements.

Current wording

Among the changes being implemented by CMS are provisions of the IMPACT Act, which imposes a stringent timeline for implementing benchmark quality measures and data metrics across facilities that include SNFs. The enactment mandates specific actions to design a unified payment methodology for post-acute providers, which CMS implements through ongoing regulations. The costs of final implementation may be significant, with potential fines and payment reductions resulting from a failure to meet CMS's implementation requirements. The current Presidential Administration, whether through executive orders or through the actions of HHS, may take additional actions through rulemaking, priority-setting and other exercises of discretion that may materially affect our business in ways that cannot presently be foreseen.

Previous wording

Reductions in reimbursement rates or the scope of services being reimbursed could have a material, adverse effect on our revenue, financial condition and results of operations or even result in reimbursement rates that are insufficient to cover our operating costs. In addition, CMS may make future adjustments to reimbursement levels and underlying reimbursement formulae as it continues to monitor the impact of current payments system on patient outcomes and budget neutrality. The Biden-Harris Administration focused on studying the nursing home industry and directed HHS to issue proposed rules based on those studies, including changes to SNF facility reimbursement and specifically, the SNF-VBP Program, which may also adversely affect our reimbursement. The change in presidency following the 2024 presidential election may result in different focuses with respect to the nursing home industry. The new Presidential Administration's policy directives and priorities regarding the nursing home industry and SNFs in particular are not yet known. These metrics potentially affecting our revenues and expenses in future government fiscal years include the SNF healthcare-associated infections (HAI) measurement, total nursing hours per resident day measures, and discharge to community - post acute care measure. The Interoperability Final Rule’s implementation beginning in 2026, and to be completed by January 1, 2027, may also adversely affect our reimbursement paid through Medicare, specifically including Medicare Advantage.

Current wording

Reductions in reimbursement rates or the scope of services being reimbursed could have a material, adverse effect on our revenue, financial condition and results of operations or even result in reimbursement rates that are insufficient to cover our operating costs. In addition, CMS may make future adjustments to reimbursement levels and underlying reimbursement formulae as it continues to monitor the impact of current payments system on patient outcomes and budget neutrality. The Biden-Harris Administration focused on studying the nursing home industry and directed HHS to issue proposed rules based on those studies, including changes to SNF facility reimbursement and specifically, the SNF-VBP Program, which may also adversely affect our reimbursement. The current Presidential Administration's policy directives and priorities regarding the nursing home industry and SNFs in particular are not yet fully known. As of July 4, 2025, Congress passed and the current Presidential Administration signed into law the OBBB, which reversed and limited the efficacy of certain parts of the ACA, including expansion of the Medicaid program in participating states. Additionally, CMS has prescribed strict guidelines regarding how SNFs’ are able to use pre-admission arbitration agreements.

Previous wording

A significant portion of reimbursement for skilled nursing services comes from Medicaid. In fact, Medicaid is our largest source of revenue, accounting for 46.0% of our revenue for both the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Medicaid is a state-administered program financed by both state funds and matching federal funds. Medicaid spending has increased rapidly in recent years, becoming a significant component of state budgets, which has led both the federal government and many states to institute measures aimed at controlling the growth of Medicaid spending, and in some instances reducing aggregate Medicaid spending. Since a significant portion of our revenue is generated from our skilled nursing independent subsidiaries in California, Texas and Arizona, any budget reductions or delays in these states could adversely affect our net patient service revenue and profitability. Due to recent fluctuations in state budgets many of the states in which we operate (including those with current budget surpluses), are seeking to contain costs on Medicaid outlays for SNFs, and any such decline could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

A significant portion of reimbursement for skilled nursing services comes from Medicaid. In fact, Medicaid is our largest source of revenue, accounting for 45.8% and 46.0% of our revenue for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Medicaid is a state-administered program financed by both state funds and matching federal funds. Medicaid spending has increased rapidly in recent years, becoming a significant component of state budgets, which has led both the federal government and many states to institute measures aimed at controlling the growth of Medicaid spending, and in some instances reducing aggregate Medicaid spending. Since a significant portion of our revenue is generated from our skilled nursing independent subsidiaries in California, Texas and Arizona, any budget reductions or delays in these states could adversely affect our net patient service revenue and profitability. Due to recent fluctuations in state budgets many of the states in which we operate (including those with current budget surpluses), are seeking to contain costs on Medicaid outlays for SNFs, and any such decline could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

To generate funds to pay for the increasing costs of the Medicaid program, many states utilize financial arrangements commonly referred to as provider taxes. Under provider tax arrangements, states collect taxes from healthcare providers and then use the revenue to pay the providers as a Medicaid expenditure, which allows the states to then claim additional federal matching funds on the additional reimbursements. Current federal law provides for a cap on the maximum allowable provider tax as a percentage of the providers' total revenue. There can be no assurance that federal law will continue to provide matching federal funds on state Medicaid expenditures funded through provider taxes, or that the current caps on provider taxes will not be reduced. Any discontinuance or reduction in federal matching of provider tax-related Medicaid expenditures could have a significant and adverse effect on states' Medicaid expenditures, and as a result could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Current wording

To generate funds to pay for the increasing costs of the Medicaid program, many states utilize financial arrangements commonly referred to as provider taxes. The OBBB’s passage prohibits the imposition of new provider taxes or increase of existing provider taxes, except for intermediate care facilities and nursing homes. Under provider tax arrangements, states collect taxes from healthcare providers and then use the revenue to pay the providers as a Medicaid expenditure, which allows the states to then claim additional federal matching funds on the additional reimbursements. Current federal law provides for a cap on the maximum allowable provider tax as a percentage of the providers' total revenue. There can be no assurance that federal law will continue to provide matching federal funds on state Medicaid expenditures funded through provider taxes, or that the current caps on provider taxes will not be reduced.

Previous wording

For example, Washington state incorporates the costs of direct care, indirect care, and capital expenditures for SNF services in computing the State’s Medicaid payments to nursing facilities. Using periodically updated calculations that account for factors including case acuity, fair market value of capital expenditures, inflation, and facility performance, Washington sets facility compensation so that the majority of Medicaid reimbursement paid to a skilled nursing facility is used for care-related activities, with limitations on how much a facility’s reimbursement may increase from year to year. Washington state first adopted this care-based payment model in 2015 and has periodically updated it since, including in 2020, 2022, and 2023; it is expected that Washington will continue to amend this law in the future. For state fiscal year 2024, Texas requires all nursing facilities must show that a portion of funds paid to SNFs by Texas’s Medicaid program, including both fee-for-service and managed care reimbursement, were expended for direct care activities, including direct care staff wages and benefits. In addition, California in the past has proposed bills that, if passed, would require nursing facilities to spend a stated percentage of revenue on direct patient-related services. While the most recent attempt by the California Assembly (Bill 1537) to impose direct spending requirements on SNFs has been placed in suspense with no action being taken, similar legislation in the future may seek to impose identical or analogous funding requirements for SNFs operating in California or other states.

Current wording

For example, Washington state incorporates the costs of direct care, indirect care, and capital expenditures for SNF services in computing the State’s Medicaid payments to nursing facilities. Using periodically updated calculations that account for factors including case acuity, fair market value of capital expenditures, inflation, and facility performance, Washington sets facility compensation so that the majority of Medicaid reimbursement paid to a skilled nursing facility is used for care-related activities, with limitations on how much a facility’s reimbursement may increase from year to year. Washington state first adopted this care-based payment model in 2015 and has periodically updated it since, including in 2020, 2022, and 2023; it is expected that Washington will continue to amend this law in the future. For state fiscal year 2024, Texas requires all nursing facilities must show that a portion of funds paid to SNFs by Texas’s Medicaid program, including both fee-for-service and managed care reimbursement, were expended for direct care activities, including direct care staff wages and benefits. For state fiscal year 2025, Texas is replacing the previous spending requirement with the patient care expense ratio (PCER) which measures the proportion of a facility's Medicaid revenue that is spent on patient care expenses. The PCER is a financial accountability metric and will be reported annually.

Previous wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, the ACA has resulted in significant changes to our operations and reimbursement models for services we provide. CMS continues to issue rules to implement the ACA, including most recently, new rules regarding the implementation of the anti-discrimination provisions and proposed rules requiring the disclosure of SNF ownership, organization, management and the identity of the real property owners from which the SNF leases or subleases its operating space. With the passage of the IRA in 2022, Congress continues to expand and supplement the ACA, including through the continuation of federally funded insurance premium subsidies. This modification of the ACA by the IRA indicates that Congress may continue to change and expand the ACA in the future. The outcome of the 2024 presidential election, which saw a change in control of both the Presidency and Senate to the Republican party, may signal further changes to the ACA, including reversing regulatory changes made under the Biden-Harris Administration.

Current wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, the ACA has resulted in significant changes to our operations and reimbursement models for services we provide. CMS continues to issue rules to implement the ACA, including rules regarding the implementation of the anti-discrimination provisions and disclosure of SNF ownership, organization, management and the identity of the real property owners from which the SNF leases or subleases its operating space.

Previous wording

The efficacy of the ACA is the subject of much debate among members of Congress and the public and it has been the subject of extensive litigation before numerous courts, including the United States Supreme Court, with varying outcomes — some expanding and others limiting the ACA. If the ACA is repealed or any elements of the ACA that are beneficial to our business are materially amended or changed, such as provisions regarding the health insurance industry, reimbursement and insurance coverage by payers, our business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed. Thus, the future impact of the ACA on our business is difficult to predict and its continued uncertain future may negatively impact our business.

Current wording

The efficacy of the ACA is the subject of much debate among members of Congress and the public and it has been the subject of extensive litigation before numerous courts, including the United States Supreme Court, with varying outcomes — some expanding and others limiting the ACA. If the ACA is repealed or any elements of the ACA that are beneficial to our business are materially amended or changed, as is the case under the OBBB as enacted, such as provisions regarding the health insurance industry, reimbursement and insurance coverage by payers, our business, operating results and financial condition could be harmed. Thus, the future impact of the ACA on our business is difficult to predict and its continued uncertain future may negatively impact our business.

Previous wording

While it is not possible to predict whether and when any such changes will occur, specific proposals discussed leading up to the 2024 presidential election, including a repeal or material amendment of the ACA, could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. The ACA continues to be a salient political topic and proposed changes to it may become the subject of campaign promises, litigation, administrative action, or legislation following the 2024 presidential election. In addition, even if the ACA is not amended or repealed, the President and the executive branch of the federal government, as well as CMS and HHS, have a significant impact on the implementation of the provisions of the ACA. It is expected that the incoming Presidential Administration will make changes impacting the implementation and enforcement of the ACA, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. We have already seen such changes with the Biden-Harris Administration's regulatory activity promulgating rules regarding anti-discrimination under Section 1557 of the ACA and recent rulemaking requiring SNFs to disclose their ownership and the ownership of service providers under Section 6101 of the ACA. It is not possible to know whether, when, or how any or all of these regulations or their implementation will be changed, the manner in which any change may be effected, and the ultimate effects of such changes on our business. If we are slow or unable to adapt to any such changes, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Current wording

While it is not possible to predict whether and when any such changes will occur, proposals discussed by the current Presidential Administration, including a repeal or material amendment of the ACA, could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. The ACA continues to be a salient political topic and proposed changes to it may become the subject of campaign promises, litigation, administrative action, or legislation under the current Presidential Administration, and the Senate, where the Republican party now holds a majority of seats. In addition, even if the ACA is not amended or repealed, the President and the executive branch of the federal government, as well as CMS and HHS, have a significant impact on the implementation of the provisions of the ACA. It is expected that the current Presidential Administration will make changes affecting the implementation and enforcement of the ACA, which could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. We have already seen such changes with the current Presidential Administration's impacts to the Biden-Harris Administration's regulatory activity promulgating rules regarding anti-discrimination under Section 1557 of the ACA and rulemaking requiring SNFs to disclose their ownership and the ownership of service providers under Section 6101 of the ACA. It is not possible to know whether, when, or how any or all of these regulations or their implementation will be changed, the manner in which any change may be effected, and the ultimate effects of such changes on our business. If we are slow or unable to adapt to any such changes, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

In 2023, CMS issued a final rule requiring SNFs to disclose certain information regarding their ownership and managerial relationships which was fully implemented in November of 2024. This final rule is more invasive and comprehensive than the ownership information already disclosed through Medicare's Nursing Home Compare website. Refer to Item 1., under Government Regulation, for additional information. The breadth of disclosure required by this new rule may be adverse to our business interests and detrimental to our operations, revenue, and profitability and may have a chilling effect on investment due to the depth of the new reporting and transparency requirements. Similarly, California passed a comparable law requiring the disclosure of certain ownership and financial information for SNFs in 2021. On March 6, 2024, California’s regulations implementing this law took effect, which may invite further scrutiny and potential legal action, whether by the state agencies or private parties, within California based on the information disclosed as required by this law and its enabling regulations.

Current wording

In 2023, CMS issued a final rule requiring SNFs to disclose certain information regarding their ownership and managerial relationships which was fully implemented in November of 2024. In furtherance of this rule, CMS proposed is requiring all SNFs to revalidate certain information using CMS's newly promulgated SNF Attachment by January 1, 2026; however, CMS issued sub-regulatory guidance suspending the deadline and did not set a new deadline for the submission. Therefore, CMS may set a new deadline for the submission of this information in the future, with an unknown period of notice ahead of compliance. Nevertheless, these disclosure requirements, if put into effect in the future, are more invasive and comprehensive than the ownership information already disclosed through Medicare's Nursing Home Compare website. Refer to Item 1., under Government Regulation, for additional information. The breadth of disclosure required by this new rule may be adverse to our business interests and detrimental to our operations, revenue, and profitability and may have a chilling effect on investment due to the depth of the new reporting and transparency requirements. Similarly, California passed a comparable law requiring the disclosure of certain ownership and financial information for SNFs in 2021. On March 6, 2024, California’s regulations implementing this law took effect, which may invite further scrutiny and potential legal action, whether by the state agencies or private parties, within California based on the information disclosed as required by this law and its enabling regulations.

Previous wording

Anticipated changes in the U.S. political environment, including those as a result of the change in Presidential administration and control of Congress, and to regulatory agencies, particularly HHS, may result in significant changes to regulatory framework, enforcements and reimbursements.

Current wording

Anticipated changes in the U.S. political environment, including those as a result of the current Presidential administration and control of Congress, and to regulatory agencies, particularly HHS, may result in significant changes to regulatory framework, enforcements, reimbursements and our business.

Previous wording

As a result of the 2024 presidential election, changes in the Presidency and both houses of Congress may result in significant changes in, and have resulted in uncertainty with respect to, legislation, regulation, implementation or repeal of laws and rules related to government health programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. In particular, proposals regarding HHS and certain programs and regulation concerning health care, including Medicare, Medicaid, and the ACA, have indicated that the incoming Presidential Administration seeks to make changes to these programs and laws, as well as their implementation. Other pending legislation, such as the Protecting America’s Seniors’ Access to Care Act and Protecting America's Rural Seniors' Access Act, which seek to halt HHS and CMS from finalizing and enforcing its proposed rule for staffing requirements, indicates a bipartisan interest in restraining HHS’s ability to finalize, implement and enforce regulations that may be burdensome on our independent subsidiaries, creating still more uncertainty and unpredictability in the legislative process.

Current wording

The current Presidential administration and control of Congress by the President's political party have resulted in changes that have caused, and will continue to cause, uncertainty with respect to legislation, regulation, implementation or repeal of laws and rules related to government health programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. This includes changes to the Medicaid program contained in the OBBB, which could reduce Medicaid funds available for reimbursement, potentially limit the amount of reimbursement paid by Medicaid for our services, potentially limit our potential resident population, adversely affect potential residents’ eligibility and ability to pay for services performed by our independent subsidiaries. Further, proposals regarding HHS and certain programs and regulations concerning health care, including Medicare, Medicaid, and the ACA, have indicated that the current Presidential administration seeks to make changes to these programs and laws, as well as their implementation.

Previous wording

Changes to existing policies and rules regarding nursing facilities, including those recently instituted, in addition to anticipated new rule proposals, may result in significant regulatory changes, increased survey frequency and scope, and increased penalties for non-compliance. With the changes in the presidential administration, we anticipate that there may be changes in legislative control and legislative priorities. As a result, future legislation may be proposed or passed that may adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

Current wording

Changes to existing policies and rules regarding nursing facilities, including those recently instituted, in addition to anticipated new rule proposals, may result in significant regulatory changes, increased survey frequency and scope, and increased penalties for non-compliance. As a result of the current Presidential administration, we anticipate that there may be changes in legislative control and legislative priorities. As a result, future legislation may be proposed or passed that may adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. In addition, the U.S. political environment, as illustrated by the recent government shutdown, may also result in significant uncertainty regarding our business, operating results, and financial condition.

Previous wording

We continually monitor these developments in order to respond to the changing regulatory environment impacting our business. While it is not possible to predict whether and when any such changes will occur, specific proposals discussed during and after the election, including a repeal or material amendment of the ACA or other laws affecting the provision of healthcare services, could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. If we are slow or unable to adapt to any such changes, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Current wording

We continually monitor these developments in order to respond to the changing regulatory environment impacting our business. While it is not possible to predict whether and when any such changes will occur, specific proposals made by the current Administration or others in anticipation of mid-term elections in the U.S., including a repeal or material amendment of the ACA, potential cuts to the Medicare or Medicaid programs by Congress through the budget reconciliation process, or other laws affecting the provision of healthcare services, could harm our business, operating results and financial condition. If we are slow or unable to adapt to any such changes, our business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Previous wording

As a result of our participation in the Medicaid and Medicare programs, we are subject to various governmental reviews, audits and investigations to verify our compliance with the rules associated with these programs and related applicable laws and regulations, including our claims for payments submitted to those programs, which are subject to reviews by Recovery Audit Contractors, Zone Program Integrity Contractors, Program Safeguard Contractors, Unified Program Integrity Contractors, Supplemental Medical Review Contractors and Medicaid Integrity Contractors programs (collectively referred to as Reviews). In these Reviews, third-party firms engaged by CMS conduct extensive analysis of claims data and medical and other records to identify potential improper payments under the federal and state programs. As discussed above, the Biden-Harris Administration has called for HHS and CMS to increase the level of scrutiny of SNF facilities and requested those agencies to adopt rules that would impose greater penalties upon non-compliant SNF operators, and this scrutiny may not change due to a change of Presidential Administration, including changes to the leadership of HHS and CMS. The SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule implemented increased penalties that surveyors may impose on SNFs for perceived non-compliance with CMS’s requirements for SNF participation in Medicare. In addition, in 2023, CMS updated the survey resources that CMS and state surveyors use in evaluating our SNFs’ compliance with federal Requirements for Participation, incorporating recent changes to CMS’s methods for surveying infection control procedures.

Current wording

As a result of our participation in the Medicaid and Medicare programs, we are subject to various governmental reviews, audits and investigations to verify our compliance with the rules associated with these programs and related applicable laws and regulations, including our claims for payments submitted to those programs, which are subject to reviews by Recovery Audit Contractors, Zone Program Integrity Contractors, Program Safeguard Contractors, Unified Program Integrity Contractors, Supplemental Medical Review Contractors and Medicaid Integrity Contractors programs (collectively referred to as Reviews). In these Reviews, third-party firms engaged by CMS conduct extensive analysis of claims data and medical and other records to identify potential improper payments under the federal and state programs. The FY 2025 PPS introduced higher penalties that surveyors can impose on SNFs if they are found to be non-compliant with CMS’s requirements for SNF participation in Medicare program. In addition, in 2023, CMS updated the survey resources and guidelines used both by CMS and state surveyors in evaluating our SNFs’ compliance with federal participation requirements. These updates included new approaches for evaluating infection control procedures, reflecting recent changes in CMS's survey methodologies.

Previous wording

In cases where claim and documentation review by a CMS contractor results in repeated unsatisfactory results, an operation can be subjected to protracted regulatory oversight. This CMS oversight may include education and sampling of claims, extended pre-payment review, referral of the operating business to recovery audit or integrity contractors, or extrapolation of an error rate to other reimbursement made outside of specifically reviewed claims. Ongoing failure to demonstrate improvement towards meeting all claim filing and documentation requirements could ultimately lead to Medicare decertification. As of December 31, 2024 and through the filing date of this report, 18 of our independent subsidiaries had multi-claim reviews scheduled or in process, either pre- or post-payment. We anticipate that these reviews could increase in frequency in the future.

Current wording

In cases where claim and documentation review by a CMS contractor yields repeated unsatisfactory results, an operation can be subjected to protracted regulatory oversight. This CMS oversight may include education and sampling of claims, extended pre-payment review, referral of the operating business to recovery audit or integrity contractors, or extrapolation of an error rate to other reimbursement made outside of specifically reviewed claims. Ongoing failure to demonstrate improvement towards meeting all claim filing and documentation requirements could ultimately lead to Medicare decertification. As of December 31, 2025 and through the filing date of this report, 25 of our independent subsidiaries had multi-claim reviews scheduled or in process, either pre- or post-payment. We anticipate that these reviews could increase in frequency in the future.

Previous wording

•state-specified and potential federal mandates for specific nurse staffing levels;

Current wording

•state-specified mandates for specific nurse staffing levels;

Previous wording

•quality and maintenance of medical equipment and facilities;

Current wording

•quality and maintenance of medical services equipment and facilities;

Previous wording

The laws and regulations governing our operations, along with the terms of participation in various government programs, regulate how we conduct our business, the services we offer, and our interactions with patients and other healthcare providers. These laws and regulations are subject to frequent change. As noted above, the Biden-Harris Administration called upon HHS and CMS to study and propose new rules regarding staffing requirements and reimbursement for the nursing home industry, including tying reimbursement to staffing levels, salary, benefits, and retention. The change in Presidential Administration, including changes to the leadership of HHS and CMS, may not result in any change, abatement, or reduction in the enforcement of these policies, and instead could lead to even greater scrutiny. CMS's recently finalized ownership transparency rule, and similar state disclosure requirements such as California’s, discussed in Item 1., under Government Regulation, may provide an additional basis for further investigation, administrative action and ultimately fines, penalties, or sanctions if finalized, and may dissuade parties from working with us or our independent subsidiaries due to the reporting and disclosure obligations of being an Additional Disclosable Party under that final rule.

Current wording

The laws and regulations governing our operations, along with the terms of participation in various government programs, regulate how we conduct our business, the services we offer, and our interactions with patients and other healthcare providers. These laws and regulations are subject to frequent change. CMS's ownership transparency rule, which was fully implemented by November of 2024, and similar state disclosure requirements such as California’s, discussed in Item 1., under Government Regulation, may provide an additional basis for further investigation, administrative action and ultimately fines, penalties, or sanctions if finalized, and may dissuade parties from working with us or our independent subsidiaries due to the reporting and disclosure obligations of being an Additional Disclosable Party under that final rule.

Previous wording

We believe that such regulations that may adversely affect our business, operation and profitability. The quantity and scope of these regulations may increase in the future, and we cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or impact on us of any healthcare reform legislation. If we fail to comply with these applicable laws and regulations, or their interpretations as determined by courts or enforced by regulators, we could suffer civil or criminal penalties and other detrimental consequences, including denial of reimbursement, imposition of fines, temporary suspension of admission of new patients, suspension or decertification from the Medicaid and Medicare programs, restrictions on our ability to acquire new facilities or expand or operate existing facilities, the loss of our licenses to operate and the loss of our ability to participate in federal and state reimbursement programs. Additionally, in the future, different interpretations or enforcement of these laws and regulations could subject our current or past practices to allegations of impropriety or illegality or could require us to make changes in our facilities, equipment, personnel, services, capital expenditure programs and operating expenses.

Current wording

We believe that such regulations may adversely affect our business, operation and profitability. The quantity and scope of these regulations may increase in the future, and we cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or impact on us of any healthcare reform legislation. If we fail to comply with these applicable laws and regulations, or their interpretations as determined by courts or enforced by regulators, we could suffer civil or criminal penalties and other detrimental consequences, including denial of reimbursement, imposition of fines, temporary suspension of admission of new patients, suspension or decertification from the Medicaid and Medicare programs, restrictions on our ability to acquire new facilities or expand or operate existing facilities, the loss of our licenses to operate and the loss of our ability to participate in federal and state reimbursement programs. Additionally, in the future, different interpretations or enforcement of these laws and regulations could subject our current or past practices to allegations of impropriety or illegality or could require us to make changes in our facilities, equipment, personnel, services, capital expenditure programs and operating expenses.

Previous wording

CMS's efforts to enhance its enforcement powers and increase enforcement activities towards SNFs, as discussed in Item 1., under Government Regulation, result in state survey agencies having more accountability for their survey and enforcement efforts. Within the SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule, CMS obtained greater ability to impose monetary penalties upon SNFs for incident-based and day-based violations of CMS’s conditions of participation. Further, the enhanced penalties against SFFs under the Biden-Harris Administration represented further federal calls for transparency, oversight and penalties for low-ranked and underperforming SNFs. These policies may prove to be popular, effective, or otherwise desirable and might not change with a new Presidential Administration, including under new leadership of HHS and CMS. These enhanced penalties and enforcement activities precedes greater focus by CMS in obtaining oversight over SFFs, and continuing that oversight even after those SFFs improve, and subjecting them to more exacting and routine oversight. The likely result may be more frequent surveys of our independent subsidiaries, with more substantial penalties, fines and other consequences if they do not perform well. For low-performing facilities in the SFF program, the standards for successfully emerging from that program and not being subject to ongoing and enhanced government oversight will be higher and measured over a longer period of time, prolonging the risks of monetary penalties, fines and potential suspension or exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Current wording

CMS's efforts to enhance its enforcement powers and increase enforcement activities towards SNFs, as discussed in Item 1., Government Regulation, result in state survey agencies having more accountability for their survey and enforcement efforts. Within the FY 2025 PPS, CMS obtained greater ability to impose monetary penalties upon SNFs for incident-based and day-based violations of CMS’s conditions of participation. Further, the enhanced penalties against SFFs under the Biden-Harris Administration represented further federal calls for transparency, oversight and penalties for low-ranked and underperforming SNFs. These policies may prove to be popular, effective, or otherwise desirable and might not change with a new Presidential Administration, including under new leadership of HHS and CMS. These enhanced penalties and enforcement activities precedes greater focus by CMS in obtaining oversight over SFFs, and continuing that oversight even after those SFFs improve as recommended by the OIG in its October 24, 2025 report and recommendations regarding the SFF program, and subjecting them to more exacting and routine oversight. The likely result may be more frequent surveys of our independent subsidiaries, with more substantial penalties, fines and other consequences if they do not perform well. For low-performing facilities in the SFF program, the standards for successfully emerging from that program and not being subject to ongoing and enhanced government oversight will be higher and measured over a longer period of time, prolonging the risks of monetary penalties, fines and potential suspension or exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Previous wording

From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we receive deficiency reports from state and federal regulatory bodies resulting from such inspections or surveys. CMS's updated guidance to these surveyors incorporate recent changes to CMS’s methods for surveying infection control procedures. Additionally, CMS's recently finalized rule requiring disclosure of ownership and financial relationships between nursing facilities and property owners or management entities, as well as other state rules over ownership transparency, may provide an additional basis for further investigation, administrative action, and ultimately fines, penalties, or sanctions and could dissuade individuals and businesses from doing business with us or our independent subsidiaries.

Current wording

From time to time in the ordinary course of business, we receive deficiency reports from state and federal regulatory bodies resulting from such inspections or surveys. CMS's updated guidance to these surveyors incorporate recent changes to CMS’s methods for surveying infection control procedures. Additionally, CMS's rule requiring disclosure of ownership and financial relationships between nursing facilities and property owners or management entities, which now carries new requirements for re-certification that have been delayed in implementation and may take effect at a future, yet-unknown date, as well as other state rules over ownership transparency, may provide an additional basis for further investigation, administrative action, and ultimately fines, penalties, or sanctions and could dissuade individuals and businesses from doing business with us or our independent subsidiaries.

Previous wording

We have received notices of potential sanctions and remedies based upon alleged regulatory deficiencies from time to time, and such sanctions have been imposed on some of our independent subsidiaries. We have had independent subsidiaries placed on SFF status in the past and other independent subsidiaries may be identified for such status in the future. We currently have no facilities placed on SFF status.

Current wording

We have received notices of potential sanctions and remedies based upon alleged regulatory deficiencies from time to time, and such sanctions have been imposed on some of our independent subsidiaries. We have had independent subsidiaries placed on SFF status in the past and other independent subsidiaries may be identified for such status in the future. We currently have one facility placed on SFF status.

Previous wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, in 2022 CMS updated the SFF program with the intent to reduce the amount of time a SNF spends as an SFF and increase the number of nursing homes that progress through the SFF program. The OIG has been studying the SFF program, including its 2022 updates, to understand the program’s outcomes, identify factors that aided SFFs that successfully graduated the SFF program with sustained quality improvements, and make further changes based on the data obtained in this study. In June of 2024, the OIG added the SFF program to ts Work Plan for continued attention. CMS clarified certain details of the SFF program updates in 2023 and how they are to be implemented by each state survey agency (SA). As part of the revisions to the SFF program, a priority in revising the SFF program was to address “yo-yo” noncompliance of SNFs that would graduate from the SFF program only to later see their compliance and quality measures regress after graduation, potentially requiring readmission to the SFF program. Among the measures implemented to avoid this issue of “yo-yo” noncompliance was a three-year look-back period for facilities that graduate from the SFF program to ensure that the quality and compliance improvements achieved through the SFF program were sustained. Facilities that graduate from the SFF program but continue to demonstrate poor compliance as evidenced by any SA’s survey, such as for actual harm, substandard quality of care, or immediate jeopardy deficiencies, may be subject to enhanced enforcement by CMS, up to and including termination from the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs.

Current wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, in 2022 CMS updated the SFF program with the intent to reduce the amount of time a SNF spends as an SFF and increase the number of nursing homes that progress through the SFF program. The OIG has been studying the SFF program, including its 2022 updates, to understand the program’s outcomes, identify factors that aided SFFs that successfully graduated the SFF program with sustained quality improvements, and make further changes based on the data obtained in this study. In June of 2024, the OIG added the SFF program to its Work Plan for continued attention. CMS clarified certain details of the SFF program updates in 2023 and how they are to be implemented by each state survey agency (SA). As part of the revisions to the SFF program, a priority in revising the SFF program was to address “yo-yo” noncompliance of SNFs that would graduate from the SFF program only to later see their compliance and quality measures regress after graduation, potentially requiring readmission to the SFF program. Among the measures implemented to avoid this issue of “yo-yo” noncompliance was a three-year look-back period for facilities that graduate from the SFF program to ensure that the quality and compliance improvements achieved through the SFF program were sustained. This lookback period and focus on maintaining a high level of improvement over time are consistent with the OIG's findings regarding the need for greater oversight to sustain improved outcomes at facilities that graduate from the SFF program. Facilities that graduate from the SFF program but continue to demonstrate poor compliance as evidenced by any SA’s survey, such as for actual harm, substandard quality of care, or immediate jeopardy deficiencies, may be subject to enhanced enforcement by CMS, up to and including termination from the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs.

Previous wording

This three-year look-back for sustained improvements by facilities that graduate the SFF program poses risk for our independent subsidiaries, specifically those that may be subject to the SFF program or that have been subject to the SFF program in the past. As of December 31, 2024, we have three facilities that graduated from the SFF program within the past three years. First, for SNFs that are selected by CMS for participation in the SFF program, or which currently are in the SFF program, even graduation from the program is no longer an assurance that the SNF will be able to continue its operations. Even one survey with a significant compliance deficiency, such as actual harm or an immediate jeopardy deficiency, may result in CMS—acting solely within its discretion—terminating the SNF’s Medicare or Medicaid participation, likely triggering the termination of other payor contracts and rendering the facility economically unviable. Second, for SNFs that have graduated from the SFF program, they are subject to a three-year period of enhanced scrutiny where adverse findings by a SA and a single survey’s finding of poor compliance may result in CMS discretionally terminating that facility’s Medicare and/or Medicaid participation, which would likely cause other payors to terminate their agreements with the facility as well. As a result, the financial and manpower resources needed for graduation from the SFF program may be for nothing if, in the three years following graduation from the SFF program, a SNF receives a poor survey result and CMS imposes fines and penalties up to the termination of the facility’s Medicare and Medicaid participation.

Current wording

This three-year look-back for sustained improvements by facilities that graduate the SFF program poses risk for our independent subsidiaries, specifically those that may be subject to the SFF program or that have been subject to the SFF program in the past. As of December 31, 2025, we have one facility that graduated from the SFF program within the past three years. First, for SNFs that are selected by CMS for participation in the SFF program, or which currently are in the SFF program, even graduation from the program is no longer an assurance that the SNF will be able to continue its operations. Even one survey with a significant compliance deficiency, such as actual harm or an immediate jeopardy deficiency, may result in CMS—acting solely within its discretion—terminating the SNF’s Medicare or Medicaid participation, likely triggering the termination of other payor contracts and rendering the facility economically unviable. Second, for SNFs that have graduated from the SFF program, they are subject to a three-year period of enhanced scrutiny where adverse findings by a SA and a single survey’s finding of poor compliance may result in CMS discretionally terminating that facility’s Medicare and/or Medicaid participation, which would likely cause other payors to terminate their agreements with the facility as well. As a result, the financial and manpower resources needed for graduation from the SFF program may be for nothing if, in the three years following graduation from the SFF program, a SNF receives a poor survey result and CMS imposes fines and penalties up to the termination of the facility’s Medicare and Medicaid participation.

Previous wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, MACRA revised the payment system for physician and non-physician services. The changes to the therapy caps imposed on Medicare Part B outpatient therapy from this law have been changed by the BBA, and are subject to future budgetary changes through rulemaking and legislation, resulting in ongoing uncertainty regarding payment for these Medicare Part B services. Under both the 2024 and 2025 PFS Final Rules, reductions in conversion factor, payments to providers and conditions imposed in exchange for higher payments may impose operational requirements and working conditions that further detract from and reduce our financial performance. Similarly, new final rules concerning the PACE program and the information it will collect from our independent subsidiaries may adversely affect the risk-adjusted reimbursement.

Current wording

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, MACRA revised the payment system for physician and non-physician services. The changes to the therapy caps imposed on Medicare Part B outpatient therapy from this law have been changed by the BBA and are subject to future budgetary changes through rulemaking and legislation, resulting in ongoing uncertainty regarding payment for these Medicare Part B services. Under both the CY 2024 and CY 2025 PFS, reductions in conversion factor, payments to providers and conditions imposed in exchange for higher payments may impose operational requirements and working conditions that further detract from and reduce our financial performance. However, the CY 2026 PFS finalized an increase in conversion factors. Although there may be relief from the recent reductions in reimbursement in the future, such regulatory relief does not guarantee increases will occur again in the future rulemakings, or that Congress will defer or limit the impact of cuts due to Medicare sequestration. Similarly, new final rules concerning the PACE program and the information it will collect from our independent subsidiaries may adversely affect the risk-adjusted reimbursement.

Previous wording

HIPAA, as amended by the HITECH Act, requires us to adopt and maintain business procedures and systems designed to protect the privacy, security and integrity of patients' individual health information, in addition to state laws governing the privacy of patient information. We must comply with these state privacy laws to the extent that they are more protective of healthcare information or provide additional protections not afforded by HIPAA. The regulations enacting HIPAA periodically change and the last proposed change was issued in late 2022. In 2024, CMS published the Interoperability Final Rule, which affects the data standards and APIs that entities may use. Additionally, CMS issued its final rule updating the separate confidentiality requirements for Substance Use Disorder (SUD) records maintained. Changes to these regulations may require our independent subsidiaries to modify certain policies, procedures and practices regarding the disclosure of residents’ information. If we fail to comply with these state and federal laws, we could be subject to criminal penalties, civil sanctions, litigation, and be forced to modify our policies and procedures, in addition to undertaking costly breach notification and remediation efforts, as well as sustaining reputational harm.

Current wording

HIPAA, as amended by the HITECH Act, requires us to adopt and maintain business procedures and systems designed to protect the privacy, security and integrity of patients' individual health information, in addition to state laws governing the privacy of patient information. We must comply with these state privacy laws to the extent that they are more protective of healthcare information or provide additional protections not afforded by HIPAA. The regulations enacting HIPAA periodically change and the last proposed change was issued in late 2022. In 2024, CMS published the Interoperability Final Rule, which affects the data standards and APIs that entities may use. Additionally, the 42 CFR Part 2 final rule issued in 2024 updating the separate confidentiality requirements for substance use disorder (SUD) records requires compliance by February 16 ,2026. Changes to these regulations may require our independent subsidiaries to modify certain policies, procedures and practices regarding the disclosure of residents’ information to the extent such records would be considered SUD records. If we fail to comply with these state and federal laws, we could be subject to criminal penalties, civil sanctions, litigation, and be forced to modify our policies and procedures, in addition to undertaking costly breach notification and remediation efforts, as well as sustaining reputational harm.

Previous wording

In addition to breaches of protected patient information, under HIPAA and the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act) and other federal regulations, healthcare entities are also required to afford patients with certain rights of access to their health information and to promote sharing of patient data between and among healthcare providers involved in the same patient's course of care. Recently, the Office for Civil Rights, the agency responsible for HIPAA enforcement, has targeted investigative and enforcement efforts on violations of patients’ rights of access, imposing significant fines for violations largely initiated from patient complaints. If we fail to comply with our obligations under HIPAA, we could face significant fines. Likewise, if we fail to comply with our obligations under the Cures Act, we could face fines from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, the agency responsible for Cures Act enforcement.

Current wording

In addition to breaches of protected patient information, under HIPAA and the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act) and other federal regulations, healthcare entities are also required to afford patients with certain rights of access to their health information and to promote sharing of patient data between and among healthcare providers involved in the same patient's course of care. Recently, the Office for Civil Rights, the agency responsible for HIPAA enforcement, has targeted investigative and enforcement efforts on violations of patients’ rights of access, imposing significant fines for violations largely initiated from patient complaints. If we fail to comply with our obligations under HIPAA, we could face significant fines. Likewise, if we fail to comply with our obligations under the Cures Act, we could face fines from the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy (formerly known as the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology), the agency responsible for Cures Act enforcement.

Previous wording

Healthcare businesses are increasingly the target of cyberattacks whereby hackers disrupt business operations or obtain protected health information, often demanding large ransoms. In 2024, healthcare was among the most-breached sector of the economy based on publicly disclosed information. The frequency of this activity has increased precipitously. Our business is dependent on the proper functioning and availability of our computer systems and networks. We cannot assure you that our safety and security measures and disaster recovery plan will prevent damage, interruption or breach of our information systems and operations. Additionally, we cannot control the safety and security of our information held by third-party vendors with whom we contract. The techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and may be difficult to detect, and as such we (or third-party vendors) may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventive measures. In addition, hardware, software or applications we (or third-party vendors) develop or procure from third parties may contain defects in design or manufacture or other problems that could unexpectedly compromise the security of information systems. Unauthorized parties may attempt to gain access to our systems or facilities, or those of third parties with whom we do business, through fraud or other forms of deception. Additionally, the rapid ongoing evolution and increased adoption of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning may make it more difficult to anticipate and implement protective measures to recognize, detect and prevent the occurrence of data breaches, including but not limited to cybersecurity breaches.

Current wording

Healthcare businesses are increasingly the target of cyberattacks whereby hackers disrupt business operations or obtain protected health information, often demanding large ransoms. In 2024, healthcare was among the most-breached sector of the economy based on publicly disclosed information. This trend of healthcare as a vulnerable cybersecurity target continues in 2025 and is expected to remain a significant risk in the future. The frequency of this activity has increased precipitously over the last five years. Our business is dependent on the proper functioning and availability of our computer systems and networks. We cannot assure you that our safety and security measures and disaster recovery plan will prevent damage, interruption or breach of our information systems and operations. Additionally, we cannot control the safety and security of our information held by third-party vendors with whom we contract. The techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently and may be difficult to detect, and as such we (or third-party vendors) may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventive measures. In addition, hardware, software or applications we (or third-party vendors) develop or procure from third parties may contain defects in design or manufacture or other problems that could unexpectedly compromise the security of information systems. Unauthorized parties may attempt to gain access to our systems or facilities, or those of third parties with whom we do business, through fraud or other forms of deception. Additionally, the rapid ongoing evolution and increased adoption of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning may make it more difficult to anticipate and implement protective measures to recognize, detect and prevent the occurrence of data breaches, including but not limited to cybersecurity breaches.

Previous wording

Our independent SNFs are located in the states of Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. All states follow the current federal regulation relative to staffing, which establishes that SNFs are required to staff to meet the needs of the residents present in the facility. In addition, several states have established minimum staffing requirements for facilities operating in those states.

Current wording

Our independent SNFs are located in the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin. All states follow the current federal regulation relative to staffing, which establishes that SNFs are required to staff to meet the needs of the residents present in the facility. In addition, several states have established minimum staffing requirements for facilities operating in those states.

Previous wording

Nonetheless, for the federal government or any state government to materially change the way compliance with the minimum staffing standard is calculated or enforced, our labor costs could increase and the current shortage of healthcare workers could impact us more significantly. The broader labor market where we compete is in a state of disequilibrium where the needs of businesses such as ours outstrip the supply of available and willing workers. There is additional upward pressure on wages from different industries and more generally due to the current rate of inflation. Some of these industries compete with us for labor and others that do not, which makes it difficult to make significant hourly wage and salary increases due to the fixed nature of our reimbursement under insurance contracts as well as Medicare and Medicaid, in addition to our increasing variable costs. Due to the limited supply of qualified applicants who seek or are willing to accept employment, these broader concerns, may increase our labor costs or lead to potential staffing shortages, reduced operations to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or difficulty complying with those laws and regulations at current operational levels.

Current wording

Nonetheless, for the federal government or any state government to materially change the way compliance with the minimum staffing standard is calculated or enforced, our labor costs could increase and the current shortage of healthcare workers could impact us more significantly. The broader labor market where we compete is in a state of disequilibrium where the needs of businesses such as ours outstrip the supply of available and willing workers. There is additional upward pressure on wages from different industries and more generally due to the current rate of inflation. Some of these industries compete with us for labor and others that do not, which makes it difficult to make significant hourly wage and salary increases due to the fixed nature of our reimbursement under insurance contracts as well as Medicare and Medicaid (which may face challenges as a result of the enactment of the OBBB), in addition to our increasing variable costs. Due to the limited supply of qualified applicants who seek or are willing to accept employment, these broader concerns, may increase our labor costs or lead to potential staffing shortages, reduced operations to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or difficulty complying with those laws and regulations at current operational levels.

Previous wording

Federal laws and regulations, such as the Staffing Rule, may increase our costs of maintaining qualified nursing and skilled personnel, or make it more difficult for us to attract or retain qualified nurses and skilled staff members. Proposed legislation, such as the previously proposed Nursing Home Improvement Act and the proposed HCBS Access Act, may make it more expensive to compete for, hire, and retain nursing staff, if passed into law in substantially the same form as previously introduced to Congress. The Biden-Harris Administration sought to increase staffing level requirements for the nursing home industry and to tie reimbursement to the salary, benefits, and retention of staff, which may increase our labor costs. The change in Presidential Administration may not result in a change in this policy, and instead it is possible that HHS and CMS, under new leadership, could impose more stringent requirements for staffing. CMS has published guidance to surveyors addressing topics that specifically include nurse staffing and collection of payroll data to evaluate appropriate staffing levels, which may lead to future regulations that increase our staffing requirements and labor costs or lower revenues.

Current wording

Laws and regulations may increase our costs of maintaining qualified nursing and skilled personnel, or make it more difficult for us to attract or retain qualified nurses and skilled staff members. Proposed legislation, such as the previously proposed Nursing Home Improvement Act and the proposed HCBS Access Act, may make it more expensive to compete for, hire, and retain nursing staff, if passed into law in substantially the same form as previously introduced to Congress. Although the Staffing Rule is not likely to take effect due to HHS and CMS's abandonment of appeals in its defense, promulgation of an interim final rule to prohibit the Staffing Rule's staffing ratios from taking effect, and defunding of the Staffing Rule by the OBBB, future presidential administrations may revive this concept and seek to restore that rule or impose new staffing rules that are equally or more stringent.