Summary of Significant Accounting Policies | Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for interim financial information. Certain information and disclosures normally included in consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted. Accordingly, these condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in our prospectus filed with the SEC on June 26, 2015 pursuant to Rule 424(b) of the Securities Act of 1933. The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements are unaudited. Our unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a basis consistent with that used to prepare our audited annual consolidated financial statements and include, in the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal and recurring items, necessary for the fair statement of the condensed consolidated financial statements. The operating results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2015 are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the full year ending December 31, 2015 . There have been no significant changes in our accounting policies from those disclosed in our annual consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in the prospectus referred to above. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates based on historical data and experience, as well as various other factors that management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Fair Value Measurements The following table summarizes our financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 by level within the fair value hierarchy. Financial assets and financial liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement (in thousands): June 30, 2015 December 31, 2014 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total Fair Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total Fair Cash equivalents $ 69,199 $ — $ — $ 69,199 $ 3,696 $ — $ — $ 3,696 Total Assets $ 69,199 $ — $ — $ 69,199 $ 3,696 $ — $ — $ 3,696 Contingent consideration $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 2,429 $ 2,429 Total Liabilities $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 2,429 $ 2,429 As of June 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014 , cash equivalents consisted of cash invested in money market funds. Contingent consideration issued in connection with acquisitions is measured at fair value each period and is based on significant inputs not observable in the market, which represents a Level 3 measurement within the fair value hierarchy. The valuation of contingent consideration uses assumptions we believe would be made by a market participant. We assess these estimates on an on-going basis as additional data impacting the assumptions becomes available. Changes in the fair value of contingent consideration related to updated assumptions and estimates are recognized within general and administrative expense in the consolidated condensed statements of operations. We determined the fair value of the contingent consideration using the probability weighted discounted cash flow method. The significant inputs used in the fair value measurement of contingent consideration are the probability of achieving revenue thresholds and determining discount rates. The following table summarizes the changes in contingent consideration liability (in thousands): Three Months Ended June 30, Six Months Ended June 30, 2015 2014 2015 2014 Fair value, at beginning of period $ 2,429 $ 2,234 $ 2,429 $ 2,403 Change in fair value recorded in general and administrative expenses — 173 — 4 Payment of contingent consideration $ (2,429 ) $ — $ (2,429 ) — Fair value, at end of period $ — $ 2,407 $ — $ 2,407 The contingent consideration liability was recorded in other current liabilities on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2014 . On May 6, 2015, we paid the final earn-out payment in the amount of $2.4 million . There were no changes to our valuation techniques used to measure asset and liability fair values on a recurring basis during the six months ended June 30, 2015 . The carrying amounts of cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate fair value because of the short maturity of these items. The carrying value of our SecureDocs’ note receivable approximates its fair value based on a discounted cash flow analysis. The fair value of our long-term debt approximates its fair value as of June 30, 2015 based on rates available to us for debt with similar terms and maturities, and is a Level 2 measurement. Certain assets, including goodwill and intangible assets, are also subject to measurement at fair value on a non-recurring basis if they are deemed to be impaired as a result of an impairment review. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2015 , no impairments were identified on those assets required to be measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis. Net Loss per Share The following table presents a reconciliation of our weighted average number of shares used to compute net loss per share (in thousands): Three Months Ended June 30, Six Months Ended June 30, 2015 2014 2015 2014 Weighted average shares outstanding 9,474 9,013 9,278 8,964 Less: Weighted average unvested restricted shares subject to repurchase 146 253 156 282 Weighted average number of shares used to compute basic and diluted net loss per share 9,328 8,760 9,122 8,682 Because we reported net losses for all periods presented, all potentially dilutive common stock equivalents are antidilutive for those periods. The following table presents the number of anti-dilutive shares excluded from the calculation of diluted net loss per share as of June 30, 2015 and 2014 (in thousands): June 30, 2015 2014 Options to purchase common stock 1,141 676 Conversion of convertible preferred stock — 17,007 Unvested restricted stock awards 158 242 Total shares excluded from net loss per share attributable to common stockholders 1,299 17,925 Comprehensive Loss ASC 220, Comprehensive Income , establishes standards for the reporting and display of comprehensive loss and its components in the financial statements. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 , we had no other comprehensive income (loss) items; therefore, comprehensive loss equals net loss. Accordingly, we have not included a separate statement of comprehensive loss. Recent Accounting Pronouncements Under the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act (the “JOBS Act”), we meet the definition of an emerging growth company. We have irrevocably elected to opt out of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act. In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASU 2014-09”), which requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers. ASU 2014-09 will replace most existing revenue recognition guidance in GAAP when it becomes effective. ASU 2014-09 is effective on January 1, 2018. Early adoption is permitted as of January 1, 2017. The standard permits the use of either a retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. We have not determined which transition method we will adopt, nor have we determined the effect of this guidance on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or disclosures. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, Interest— Imputation of Interest—Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs (“ASU 2015-03”), which requires an entity to record debt issuance costs in the balance sheet as a direct deduction of a recognized debt liability. ASU 2015-03 is effective for accounting periods beginning after December 15, 2015; however, early adoption is permitted. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2015 , we elected to adopt this guidance. The impact of the early adoption of this guidance was to record $0.1 million of third-party debt financing costs as a reduction in the outstanding amount of our term loan from Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.in March 2015. The adoption of this guidance did not impact prior period financial statements as we had no debt outstanding. For additional information regarding the term loan, refer to Note 7, Long-term Debt. In May 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-09, Financial Services-Insurance (Topic 944): Disclosures about Short-Duration Contracts ("ASU 2015-09") , requires insurance entities to disclose for annual reporting periods information about the liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses. ASU 2015-09 is effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods within annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted. There is no financial impact to adopt this guidance on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows as the update is disclosure related. |