| |
Year ended August 31, | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
---|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash flows from operating activities: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | | $ | 37,151 | | $ | 33,084 | | $ | 26,058 | |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by | | | | | | | | | | | |
operating activities, net of business acquisitions: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | | | | 24,517 | | | 22,408 | | | 18,450 | |
Amortization of deferred loan costs | | | | 476 | | | 488 | | | 768 | |
Share-based employee compensation expense | | | | 13,982 | | | 494 | | | 820 | |
Excess tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements | | | | (10,936 | ) | | 11,672 | | | 10,013 | |
Increase in accounts receivable, net | | | | (12,281 | ) | | (6,485 | ) | | (7,174 | ) |
(Increase) decrease in other current assets | | | | (3,716 | ) | | 1,098 | | | (1,425 | ) |
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable | | | | 5,599 | | | (3,562 | ) | | 4,824 | |
Increase (decrease) in accrued salaries and benefits | | | | 9,162 | | | 18,880 | | | (3,959 | ) |
Increase in other current liabilities | | | | 46,434 | | | 820 | | | 3,040 | |
Deferred income taxes | | | | (11,217 | ) | | (5,456 | ) | | (468 | ) |
Other | | | | 3,621 | | | 2,003 | | | 3,841 | |
(Increase) decrease in other assets | | | | (1,539 | ) | | 633 | | | 231 | |
Payments on other long-term liabilities | | | | (1,445 | ) | | (872 | ) | | (371 | ) |
|
| |
Net cash flows provided by operating activities | | | | 99,808 | | | 75,205 | | | 54,648 | |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash flows from investing activities: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Acquisition of property and equipment | | | | (27,356 | ) | | (16,161 | ) | | (26,189 | ) |
Purchases of investments | | | | — | | | (2,000 | ) | | (6,000 | ) |
Proceeds on sale of investments | | | | — | | | 9,040 | | | 70 | |
Business acquisitions, net of cash acquired | | | | (115 | ) | | (1,120 | ) | | (60,223 | ) |
|
| |
Net cash flows used in investing activities | | | | (27,471 | ) | | (10,241 | ) | | (92,342 | ) |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash flows from financing activities: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Decrease (increase) in restricted cash | | | | 3,811 | | | (2,287 | ) | | (1,524 | ) |
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt | | | | — | �� | | 48,000 | | | 60,000 | |
Deferred loan costs | | | | (924 | ) | | (730 | ) | | (2,315 | ) |
Excess tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements | | | | 10,936 | | | — | | | — | |
Exercise of stock options | | | | 5,328 | | | 4,599 | | | 4,258 | |
Payments of long-term debt | | | | (163 | ) | | (96,226 | ) | | (12,424 | ) |
|
| |
Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities | | | | 18,988 | | | (46,644 | ) | | 47,995 | |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents | | | | 91,325 | | | 18,320 | | | 10,301 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | | | | 63,467 | | | 45,147 | | | 34,846 | |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | | | $ | 154,792 | | $ | 63,467 | | $ | 45,147 | |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash paid during the year for interest | | | $ | 548 | | $ | 1,099 | | $ | 2,749 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Cash paid during the year for income taxes | | | $ | 16,415 | | $ | 18,198 | | $ | 6,367 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Noncash Activities: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuance of unregistered common stock associated with | | | | | | | | | | | |
Health IQ acquisition | | | $ | — | | $ | 1,544 | | $ | — | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuance of unregistered common stock associated with | | | | | | | | | | | |
Outcomes Verification Program | | | $ | — | | $ | — | | $ | 1,812 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Years Ended August 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004
1. | Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
Healthways, Inc. (formerly American Healthways, Inc.) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries provide specialized, comprehensive Health and Care Support programs and services to health plans, governments, employers, and hospitals in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam.
We have reclassified certain items in prior periods to conform to current classifications.
a. Principles of Consolidation - The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its subsidiaries, all of which are wholly-owned. We have eliminated all intercompany profits, transactions and balances.
b. Cash and Cash Equivalents - Cash and cash equivalents primarily include tax-exempt debt instruments, repurchase agreements, commercial paper, and other short-term investments with original maturities of less than three months. We also include in cash and cash equivalents any accrued interest related to these items.
c. Restricted Cash – Restricted cash at August 31, 2005 represented funds held in escrow in connection with a contractual requirement with a customer. In accordance with the terms of the contract, in January 2006 the entire $3.8 million was released from escrow and reclassified to cash and cash equivalents as our first-year results were validated with the customer.
d. Accounts Receivable - Billed receivables primarily represent fees that are contractually due in the ordinary course of providing our services, net of contractual adjustments. Unbilled receivables primarily represent fees that have been earned but that cannot be billed for until a contractually specified time, typically less than one year. Historically, we have experienced minimal instances of customer non-payment and therefore consider our accounts receivable to be collectible, but we may provide reserves, when appropriate, for billing adjustments at contract reconciliation.
e. Property and Equipment - Property and equipment is carried at cost and includes expenditures that increase value or extend useful lives. We recognize depreciation using the straight-line method over useful lives of three years for computer software and hardware and five to seven years for furniture and other office equipment. Leasehold improvements are depreciated over the shorter of the estimated life of the asset or the life of the lease, which ranges from two to eleven years. Depreciation expense for the years ended August 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004 was $20.6 million, $18.5 million, and $14.2 million, respectively, including amortization of assets recorded under capital leases.
f. Other Assets - Other assets consist primarily of deferred loan costs net of accumulated amortization.
g. Intangible Assets - Intangible assets subject to amortization primarily include acquired technology and customer contracts, which we amortize on a straight-line basis over a five-year estimated useful life. We assess the potential impairment of intangible assets subject to amortization whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying values may not be recoverable.
Intangible assets not subject to amortization consist of a trade name of $4.3 million. We review intangible assets not subject to amortization on an annual basis or more frequently whenever events or circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired. See Note 4 for further information on intangible assets.
38
h. Goodwill – We recognize goodwill for the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of tangible and identifiable intangible net assets of businesses that we acquire. The change in the carrying amount of goodwill for fiscal 2006 primarily relates to an earn-out agreement under which we are obligated to pay the former stockholders of Health IQ Diagnostics, LLC (“Health IQ”) additional purchase price equal to a percentage of revenues recognized from Health IQ’s programs in each of the fiscal quarters during the three-year period ending August 31, 2008 (see Note 3). Accumulated amortization of goodwill at August 31, 2006 and 2005 was $5.1 million.
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” we review goodwill at least annually for impairment. We completed our annual impairment test as of June 30, 2006 as required by SFAS No. 142 and concluded that no impairment of goodwill exists. In connection with the adoption of SFAS No. 142, we also reassessed the useful lives and the classification of our identifiable intangible assets and determined that they continue to be appropriate.
i. Contract Billings in Excess of Earned Revenue - Contract billings in excess of earned revenue primarily represent performance-based fees subject to refund that we have not recognized as revenues because either 1) data from the customer is insufficient or incomplete to measure performance; or 2) interim performance measures indicate that we are not meeting performance targets.
j. Income Taxes - We file a consolidated federal income tax return that includes all of our domestic wholly-owned subsidiaries. We compute our income tax provision under SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” SFAS No. 109 generally requires that we record deferred income taxes for the tax effect of differences between the book and tax bases of our assets and liabilities.
k. Revenue Recognition - We generally determine our contract fees by multiplying a contractually negotiated rate per member per month (“PMPM”) by the number of members covered by our services during the month. We set the PMPM rates during contract negotiations with customers based on the value we expect our programs to create and a sharing of that value between the customer and the Company.
Some contracts provide that a portion (up to 100%) of our fees may be refundable to the customer (“performance-based”) if our programs do not achieve, when compared to a baseline year, a targeted percentage reduction in the customer’s health-care costs and selected clinical and/or other criteria that focus on improving the health of the members. Approximately 10% of revenues recorded during fiscal 2006 were performance-based and were subject to final reconciliation as of August 31, 2006. We anticipate that this percentage will fluctuate due to the level of performance-based fees in new contracts, revenue recognition associated with performance-based fees, and the timing of data reconciliation, which varies according to contract terms. A limited number of contracts also provide opportunities for us to receive incentive bonuses in excess of the contractual PMPM rate if we exceed contractual performance targets.
We are participating in two Medicare Health Support (“MHS”) pilots awarded under the Chronic Care Improvement Program authorized by the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. The pilots will operate for 36 months and may be terminated by either party with six months written notice. We began operating one pilot in August 2005 to serve 20,000 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in Maryland and the District of Columbia. All fees under this pilot are performance-based. In addition, in September 2005 we began serving 20,000 beneficiaries in Georgia in collaboration with CIGNA HealthCare, Inc. The majority of our fees under our contract with CIGNA are performance-based. Both of the pilots are for complex diabetes and congestive heart failure disease management services and are operationally similar to our programs for commercial and Medicare Advantage health plan populations.
In June 2006, we signed an amendment to our cooperative agreement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) for our MHS stand-alone pilot in Maryland and the District of Columbia, which,
39
among other things, enabled us to provide congestive heart failure programs to approximately 4,500 additional Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for two years beginning on August 1, 2006 (the “refresh population”). All fees for the refresh population are performance-based.
We bill our customers each month for the entire amount of our fees contractually due for the prior month’s enrollment, which typically includes the amount, if any, that is performance-based and may be subject to refund should we not meet performance targets. Contractually, we cannot bill for any incentive bonus until after contract settlement.
We recognize revenue as follows: 1) we recognize the fixed portion of the monthly fees as revenue during the period we perform our services; 2) we recognize the performance-based portion of the monthly fees based on the most recent assessment of our performance, which represents the amount that the customer would legally be obligated to pay if the contract were terminated as of the latest balance sheet date; and 3) we recognize additional incentive bonuses based on the most recent assessment of our performance, to the extent we consider such amounts collectible.
We assess our level of performance for our contracts based on medical claims and other data that the customer is contractually required to supply. A minimum of four to six months’ data is typically required for us to measure performance. In assessing our performance, we may include estimates such as medical claims incurred but not reported and a medical cost trend compared to a baseline year. In addition, we may also provide contractual reserves, when appropriate, for billing adjustments at contract reconciliation.
Substantially all of the fees under both the MHS pilots and the refresh population in which we are participating are performance-based. The pilots require that, by the end of the third year, we achieve a cumulative net savings (total savings for the intervention population as compared to the control group less fees received from CMS) of five percent. The cumulative net savings targets are lower at the beginning of the pilots and increase in gradual increments, ending with a cumulative net savings target of five percent at the end of the pilots. Under the amendment of our stand-alone MHS pilot in Maryland and the District of Columbia, the refresh population will be a separate cohort served for two years, by the end of which the program is expected to achieve a 2.5% cumulative net savings when compared to a new control cohort. Under the stand-alone pilot, savings in excess of target achieved in either the original cohort or the refresh cohort can be applied against any savings deficit that might occur in the other cohort. Although we receive the medical claims and other data associated with the intervention group under these pilots on a monthly or more frequent basis, we assess our performance against the control group under these pilots based on quarterly performance reports received from CMS’ financial reconciliation contractor.
If data is insufficient or incomplete to measure performance, or interim performance measures indicate that we are not meeting performance targets, we do not recognize performance-based fees subject to refund as revenues but instead record them in a current liability account “contract billings in excess of earned revenue”. Only in the event we do not meet performance levels by the end of the measurement period, typically one year, are we contractually obligated to refund some or all of the performance-based fees. We would only reverse revenues that we had already recognized if performance to date in the measurement period, previously above targeted levels, subsequently dropped below targeted levels. Historically, any such adjustments have been immaterial to our financial condition and results of operations.
During the settlement process under a contract, which generally occurs six to eight months after the end of a contract year, we settle any performance-based fees and reconcile health-care claims and clinical data. As of August 31, 2006, performance-based fees that have not yet been settled with our customers but that have been recognized as revenue in the current and prior years, including performance-based fees recognized as revenue under the MHS pilots, which will not be settled with the customer until the end of the pilots, totaled approximately $54.3 million. Of this amount, $19.9 million was based on calculations which include estimates such as medical claims incurred but not reported and/or the customer’s medical cost trend compared
40
to a baseline year, while $34.4 million was based entirely on actual data received from our customers. Data reconciliation differences, for which we provide contractual allowances until we reach agreement with respect to identified issues, can arise between the customer and us due to customer data deficiencies, omissions, and/or data discrepancies.
Performance-related adjustments (including any amounts recorded as revenue that were ultimately refunded), changes in estimates, data reconciliation differences, or adjustments to incentive bonuses may cause us to recognize or reverse revenue in a current fiscal year that pertains to services provided in the prior fiscal year. During fiscal 2006, we recognized a net increase in revenue of $1.6 million that related to services provided prior to fiscal 2006.
l. Earnings Per Share – We report earnings per share under SFAS No. 128 “Earnings per Share”. We calculate basic earnings per share using weighted average common shares outstanding during the period. We calculate diluted earnings per share using weighted average common shares outstanding during the period plus the effect of all dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the period.
m. Share-Based Compensation – We account for share-based compensation in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment” which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes Accounting Principles Board Opinion (“APB”) No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and requires that all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values.
As permitted by SFAS No. 123, prior to September 1, 2005 we accounted for share-based payments to employees and outside directors using APB No. 25’s intrinsic value method and adopted the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123 and SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation - Transition and Disclosure - an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 123.” As such, we generally recognized no compensation cost for employee stock options prior to fiscal 2006.
See Note 9 for further information on share-based compensation.
n. Management Estimates – In preparing our consolidated financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, management must make estimates and assumptions that affect: 1) the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements; and 2) the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
2. | Recently Issued Accounting Standards |
| Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes |
In June 2006 the FASB issued FIN No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes - an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” FIN No. 48 creates a single model to address uncertainty in income tax positions by prescribing the minimum recognition threshold a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. It also provides guidance on derecognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. It is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We do not yet know the impact that the adoption of FIN No. 48 will have on our financial position or results of operations.
Fair Value Measurement
In September 2006 the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurement,” which provides guidance for using fair value to measure assets and liabilities, including a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes
41
the information used to develop fair value assumptions. It also requires expanded disclosure about the extent to which companies measure assets and liabilities at fair value, the information used to measure fair value, and the effect of fair value measurements on earnings. The standard applies whenever other standards require (or permit) assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value and does not expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 157 to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Effect of Prior Year Misstatements on Current Year Misstatements
In September 2006 the Securities and Exchange Commission staff published Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements,” which requires that companies quantify errors under both the “rollover” and “iron curtain” methods and evaluate the misstatement of the current year financial statements calculated under each approach. The rollover method quantifies a misstatement based on the effects of correcting the misstatement existing in the current period income statement, while the iron curtain method quantifies a misstatement based on the effects of correcting the misstatement existing in the balance sheet at the end of the current period, regardless of the misstatement’s period(s) of origin. After considering all relevant quantitative and qualitative factors, if either approach results in a misstatement that is material, a company must adjust its financial statements.
SAB No. 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006. We do not expect the adoption of SAB No. 108 to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
The change in carrying amount of goodwill during the years ended August 31, 2006 and 2005 is shown below:
(In $000s) | |
Balance, August 31, 2004 | | | $ | 93,574 | |
Health IQ acquisition and related costs | | | | 3,622 | |
StatusOne purchase price adjustments | | | | (1,176 | ) |
|
| |
Balance, August 31, 2005 | | | $ | 96,020 | |
Health IQ purchase price adjustment | | | | 115 | |
|
| |
Balance, August 31, 2006 | | | $ | 96,135 | |
|
| |
The Health IQ acquisition and related costs of $3.6 million during fiscal 2005 relate to the acquisition of Health IQ in June 2005. The StatusOne purchase price adjustments during fiscal 2005 primarily relate to $1.3 million that we received from escrow during the first quarter of fiscal 2005 after the termination of the StatusOne Health Systems, LLC (“StatusOne”) escrow agreement. The Health IQ purchase price adjustment of $0.1 million during fiscal 2006 primarily relates to an earn-out agreement under which we are obligated to pay the former stockholders of Health IQ additional purchase price equal to a percentage of revenues recognized from Health IQ’s programs in each of the fiscal quarters during the three-year period ending August 31, 2008.
Intangible assets subject to amortization at August 31, 2006 consist of the following:
42
| Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | | Net | |
---|
|
| |
(In $000s) | | | | | | | | | | | |
Acquired technology | | | $ | 10,163 | | $ | 6,098 | | $ | 4,065 | |
Customer contracts | | | | 9,179 | | | 5,519 | | | 3,660 | |
Other | | | | 200 | | | 70 | | | 130 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Total | | | $ | 19,542 | | $ | 11,687 | | $ | 7,855 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Intangible assets subject to amortization at August 31, 2005 consisted of the following:
| Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | | Net | |
---|
|
| |
(In $000s) | | | | | | | | | | | |
Acquired technology | | | $ | 10,163 | | $ | 4,065 | | $ | 6,098 | |
Customer contracts | | | | 9,233 | | | 3,725 | | | 5,508 | |
Other | | | | 200 | | | 30 | | | 170 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Total | | | $ | 19,596 | | $ | 7,820 | | $ | 11,776 | |
|
| |
| |
| |
Acquired technology, customer contracts, and other intangible assets are being amortized on a straight-line basis over a five-year estimated useful life. Total amortization expense for the years ended August 31, 2006 and 2005 was $3.9 million. Estimated amortization expense is $3.9 million for each of the next two fiscal years and $40,000, $10,000 and zero for the three fiscal years thereafter, respectively.
Intangible assets not subject to amortization at August 31, 2006 and 2005 consist of a trade name associated with the StatusOne acquisition of $4.3 million.
| Income tax expense is comprised of the following: |
| |
Year ended August 31, (in $000s) | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
---|
| |
Current taxes | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal | | | $ | 29,247 | | $ | 22,750 | | $ | 14,729 | |
State | | | | 5,977 | | | 4,416 | | | 3,016 | |
Deferred taxes | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal | | | | (9,312 | ) | | (4,941 | ) | | (165 | ) |
State | | | | (1,903 | ) | | (514 | ) | | (335 | ) |
|
| |
Total | | | $ | 24,009 | | $ | 21,711 | | $ | 17,245 | |
|
| |
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. The following table shows the significant components of our net deferred tax asset (liability) for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2006 and 2005:
43
| |
At August 31, (in $000s) | 2006 | | 2005 | |
---|
| |
Deferred tax assets: | | | | | | | | |
Accruals and reserves | | | $ | 2,681 | | $ | 2,375 | |
Spin-off stock option adjustment | | | | 13 | | | 21 | |
Deferred compensation | | | | 5,111 | | | 4,370 | |
Share based payments | | | | 5,523 | | | — | |
Capital loss carryforward | | | | 97 | | | 97 | |
|
| |
| | | | 13,425 | | | 6,863 | |
Valuation allowance | | | | (97 | ) | | (97 | ) |
|
| |
| | | | 13,328 | | | 6,766 | |
|
| |
Deferred tax liability: | | | | | | | | |
Tax over book depreciation | | | | 2,312 | | | 5,465 | |
Tax over book amortization | | | | 4,733 | | | 6,232 | |
|
| |
| | | | 7,045 | | | 11,697 | |
|
| |
Net deferred tax asset (liability) | | | $ | 6,283 | | $ | (4,931 | ) |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | |
Net current deferred tax assets | | | $ | 3,726 | | $ | 3,305 | |
Net long-term deferred tax asset (liability) | | | | 2,557 | | | (8,236 | ) |
|
| |
| | | $ | 6,283 | | $ | (4,931 | ) |
|
| |
We recorded a valuation allowance totaling approximately $97,000 against deferred tax assets as of August 31, 2006 and 2005 because management believes it is more likely than not that the net deferred tax asset related to a capital loss carryforward will not be realized in future tax periods. The capital loss carryforward will expire if unused by August 31, 2007. For fiscal 2006 and 2005, the tax benefit of stock option compensation, excluding tax benefit either relieving the deferred tax asset described as “Spin-off stock option adjustment” or related to the deferred tax asset for share-based payments subject to SFAS No. 123(R), is recorded as additional paid-in capital.
The difference between income tax expense computed using the effective tax rate and the statutory federal income tax rate follows:
| |
Year ended August 31, (in $000s) | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
---|
| |
Statutory federal income tax | | | $ | 21,406 | | $ | 19,178 | | $ | 15,156 | |
State income taxes, less federal income tax benefit | | | | 2,495 | | | 2,249 | | | 1,743 | |
Other | | | | 108 | | | 284 | | | 346 | |
|
| |
Income tax expense | | | $ | 24,009 | | $ | 21,711 | | $ | 17,245 | |
|
| |
On September 19, 2005, we entered into a Second Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Loan Agreement (the “Second Amended Credit Agreement”). The Second Amended Credit Agreement provides us with a $250.0 million revolving credit facility, including a swingline sub facility of $10.0 million and a $75.0 million sub facility for letters of credit, together with an uncommitted incremental accordion facility of $50.0 million, and expires on September 19, 2010. As of August 31, 2006, our available line of credit totaled $249.3 million.
The Second Amended Credit Agreement requires us to repay the principal on any loans at the maturity date of September 19, 2010. Borrowings under the Second Amended Credit Agreement generally bear interest, at our option, at LIBOR plus a spread of 0.875% to 1.5%, which is dependent on the ratio of total funded debt
44
to EBITDA, or at the prime rate. The Second Amended Credit Agreement also provides for a fee ranging between 0.175% and 0.3% of unused commitments. The Second Amended Credit Agreement is secured by guarantees from our active domestic subsidiaries and by security interests in substantially all of our and our subsidiaries’ assets.
The Second Amended Credit Agreement contains various financial covenants, which require us to maintain, as defined, ratios or levels of (i) total funded debt to EBITDA, (ii) fixed charge coverage, and (iii) net worth. It also restricts the payment of dividends and limits the amount of repurchases of the Company’s common stock. As of August 31, 2006, we were in compliance with all of the covenant requirements of the Second Amended Credit Agreement.
As of August 31, 2006, there were letters of credit outstanding under the Second Amended Credit Agreement for $0.7 million primarily to support our requirement to repay fees under one health plan contract in the event we do not perform at established target levels and do not repay the fees due in accordance with the terms of the contract.
To meet the reporting requirements of SFAS No. 107, “Disclosures About Fair Value of Financial Instruments,” we calculate the estimated fair value of financial instruments using quoted market prices of similar instruments or discounted cash flow techniques. At August 31, 2006 and 2005, there were no material differences between the carrying amount and the fair value of our debt.
7. | Other Long-Term Liabilities |
We have a non-qualified deferred compensation plan under which our officers may defer a portion of their salaries and receive a Company matching contribution plus a contribution based on our performance. Company contributions vest at 25% per year. We do not fund the plan and carry it as an unsecured obligation. Participants in the plan elect payout dates for their account balances, which can be no earlier than four years from the period of the deferral.
As of August 31, 2006 and 2005, other long-term liabilities included vested amounts under the plan of $6.7 million and $5.4 million, respectively, net of the current portion of $1.4 million. For the next five fiscal years, we must make plan payments of $1.4 million for the first two fiscal years, and $0.8 million, $0.3 million, and $0.2 million, for the next three fiscal years, respectively.
We maintain operating lease agreements principally for our corporate office space and our ten care enhancement centers. Our corporate office leases cover approximately 150,000 square feet and expire from August 2007 to May 2009. Our support and training offices for StatusOne contain approximately 23,000 square feet of space in aggregate and have initial terms ranging from two to five years. The care enhancement center leases cover approximately 15,000 to 33,000 square feet each and have initial terms of approximately five to eleven years.
In May 2006, we entered into an office lease agreement for our new corporate headquarters to be located near Nashville, Tennessee containing approximately 255,000 square feet of rentable area. The term of the lease is 15 years and will commence on the date that the premises are ready for occupancy, which is expected to be before March 1, 2008. The lease also provides for two renewal options of five years each at then prevailing market rates. The base rent for the initial 15-year term will be based on the actual construction costs of the building and is expected to range from $16.38 per square foot to $24.88 per square foot over the term.
45
Most of our operating leases include escalation clauses, some of which are fixed amounts, and some of which reflect changes in price indices. Certain operating leases contain renewal options to extend the lease for additional periods. Our capital lease obligation contains an option to purchase the leased property for a specified amount at the end of the lease term. For the years ended August 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, rent expense under lease agreements was approximately $7.7 million, $6.0 million, and $4.9 million, respectively.
The following table summarizes our future minimum lease payments, net of sublease income, under all capital leases and non-cancelable operating leases for each of the next five fiscal years:
| |
(In $000s) Year ending August 31, | Capital Leases | | Operating Leases | |
---|
| |
2007 | | | $ | 214 | | $ | 8,054 | |
2008 | | | | 214 | | | 8,116 | |
2009 | | | | 37 | | | 9,679 | |
2010 | | | | — | | | 9,808 | |
2011 | | | | — | | | 9,081 | |
2012 and thereafter | | | | — | | | 72,005 | |
|
| |
Total minimum lease payments | | | | 465 | | $ | 116,743 | |
| |
| |
Less amount representing interest | | | | (49 | ) | | | |
|
| | |
Present value of net minimum lease payments | | | | 416 | | | | |
Less current portion | | | | (180 | ) | | | |
|
| | |
| | | $ | 236 | | | | |
|
| | |
9. | Share-Based Compensation |
We have several shareholder-approved stock incentive plans for employees and directors. We currently have three types of share-based awards outstanding under these plans: stock options, restricted stock, and restricted stock units. We believe that such awards align the interests of our employees and directors with those of our stockholders. Prior to September 1, 2005, we accounted for these plans under the recognition and measurement provisions of APB No. 25 and related interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.”
For the years ended August 31, 2005 and 2004, we recorded compensation expense under APB No. 25 of approximately $0.5 million and $0.8 million, respectively. This expense resulted primarily from the grant, which was subject to stockholder approval, of stock options to two new directors of the Company in June 2003. We obtained such approval at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders in January 2004, at which time we issued the options. We also recognized a total income tax benefit in the statement of operations for share-based compensation arrangements of $0.2 million and $0.3 million for the years ended August 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. We generally recognize compensation expense related to fixed award stock options with graded vesting on a straight-line basis over the vesting period.
Effective September 1, 2005, we adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the modified prospective transition method. Under the modified prospective transition method, recognized compensation cost for the year ended August 31, 2006 includes 1) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted prior to, but not yet vested as of, September 1, 2005, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123; and 2) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted on or after September 1, 2005, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R). In accordance with the modified prospective method, we have not restated prior period results.
46
For the year ended August 31, 2006, we recognized share-based compensation costs of $14.0 million, which consisted of $6.6 million in cost of services and $7.4 million in selling, general and administrative expenses. We also recognized a total income tax benefit in the statement of operations for share-based compensation arrangements of $5.5 million for the year ended August 31, 2006. We did not capitalize any share-based compensation costs during fiscal 2006, 2005, or 2004.
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R), income before income taxes and net income for the year ended August 31, 2006 were $14.0 million and $8.4 million lower, respectively, than if we had continued to account for share-based compensation under APB 25. The effect of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on both basic and diluted earnings per share for the year ended August 31, 2006 was $0.25 and $0.23 per share, respectively.
Prior to adopting SFAS No. 123(R), we presented the tax benefit of stock option exercises as operating cash flows. SFAS No. 123(R) requires that tax benefits resulting from tax deductions in excess of the compensation cost recognized for those options be classified as financing cash flows.
SFAS No. 123(R) also requires companies to calculate an initial “pool” of excess tax benefits available at the adoption date to absorb any tax deficiencies that may be recognized under SFAS No.123(R). The pool includes the net excess tax benefits that would have been recognized if the company had adopted SFAS No. 123 for recognition purposes on its effective date.
We have elected to calculate the pool of excess tax benefits under the alternative transition method described in FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) No. FAS 123(R)-3, “Transition Election Related to Accounting for Tax Effects of Share-Based Payment Awards,” which also specifies the method we must use to calculate excess tax benefits reported on the statement of cash flows. The excess tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements classified as a financing cash inflow for the year ended August 31, 2006 of $10.9 million would not have been materially different if we had not adopted SFAS No. 123(R); however, they would have been classified as an operating cash inflow rather than as a financing cash inflow.
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if we had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based employee compensation for the years ended August 31, 2005 and 2004:
47
| Year ended August 31, | |
---|
|
| |
(In $000s, except per share data) | 2005 | | 2004 | |
---|
|
| |
Net income, as reported | | | $ | 33,084 | | $ | 26,058 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Add: Stock-based employee compensation | | | | | | | | |
expense included in reported net | | | | | | | | |
income, net of related tax effects | | | | 299 | | | 493 | |
Deduct: Total stock-based employee | | | | | | | | |
compensation expense determined under fair | | | | | | | | |
value based method for all awards, net of | | | | | | | | |
related tax effects | | | | (6,709 | ) | | (5,097 | ) |
|
| |
Pro forma net income | | | $ | 26,674 | | $ | 21,454 | |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | |
Earnings per share: | | | | | | | | |
Basic - as reported | | | $ | 1.00 | | $ | 0.81 | |
Basic - pro forma | | | $ | 0.80 | | $ | 0.66 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Diluted - as reported | | | $ | 0.93 | | $ | 0.75 | |
Diluted - pro forma | | | $ | 0.75 | | $ | 0.62 | |
As noted above, we have several stockholder-approved stock incentive plans for employees and directors under which we have granted non-qualified stock options, restricted stock, and restricted stock units. We grant options under these plans at market value on the date of grant. The options generally vest over or at the end of four years. Options granted on or after August 24, 2005 expire seven years from the date of grant, while options granted before August 24, 2005 expire ten years from the date of grant. Restricted share awards generally vest at the end of four years. Certain option and restricted share awards provide for accelerated vesting upon a change in control or normal or early retirement (as defined in the plans). At August 31, 2006, we have reserved approximately 546,000 shares for future equity grants under our stock incentive plans.
As of August 31, 2006, there was $26.7 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the stock incentive plans. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.4 years.
Stock Options
In June 2005, we changed from the Black-Scholes option valuation model (“Black-Scholes model”) to a lattice-based binomial option valuation model (“lattice binomial model”), which we consider preferable to the Black-Scholes model because the lattice binomial model considers characteristics of fair value option pricing, such as an option’s contractual term and the probability of exercise before the end of the contractual term, that are not available under the Black-Scholes model. For the year ended August 31, 2006, we contracted with a third party to assist in developing the assumptions, noted in the table below, used in estimating the fair values of stock options. During fiscal 2006, we based expected volatility on both historical volatility and implied volatility from traded options on the Company’s stock. The expected term of options granted was derived from the output of the lattice binomial model and represents the period of time that options granted are expected to be outstanding. We used historical data to estimate expected option exercise and post-vesting employment termination behavior within the lattice binomial model.
48
For the years ended August 31, 2005 and 2004, we estimated the fair value of each option award on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes model. We based expected volatility on historical volatility. We estimated the expected term of stock options using historical exercise and employee termination experience.
The following table shows the weighted average grant-date fair values of options and the weighted average assumptions we used to develop the fair value estimates under each of the option valuation models for the years ended August 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004:
| |
Year ended August 31, | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
---|
| |
Weighted average grant-date fair value of options | | | $ | 22.61 | | $ | 20.02 | | $ | 15.64 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Assumptions: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expected volatility | | | | 47.7 | % | | 49.8 | % | | 60.0 | % |
Expected dividends | | | | — | | | — | | | — | |
Expected term (in years) | | | | 5.3 | | | 5.7 | | | 7.4 | |
Risk-free rate | | | | 3.8 | % | | 3.8 | % | | 3.8 | % |
A summary of option activity as of August 31, 2006 and changes during the year then ended is presented below:
Options | | Shares (000s) | Weighted Average Exercise Price | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term | Aggregate Intrinsic Value ($000s) |
---|
|
Outstanding at September 1, 2005 | | | | 6,485 | | | $16.53 | | | | | | | |
Granted | | | | 215 | | | 47.52 | | | | | | | |
Exercised | | | | (782 | ) | | 6.85 | | | | | | | |
Forfeited or expired | | | | (82 | ) | | 23.69 | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | |
Outstanding at August 31, 2006 | | | | 5,836 | | | 18.87 | | | 6.3 | | | $191,337 | |
|
| | | | |
Exercisable at August 31, 2006 | | | | 3,486 | | | 10.86 | | | 5.7 | | | $142,076 | |
|
| | | | |
The total intrinsic value, which represents the difference between the underlying stock’s market price and the option’s exercise price, of options exercised during fiscal 2006, 2005, and 2004 was $29.0 million, $29.8 million, and $25.4 million, respectively.
Cash received from option exercises under all share-based payment arrangements during fiscal 2006 and 2005 was $5.3 million and $4.6 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized for the tax deductions from option exercise of the share-based payment arrangements totaled $11.5 million and $11.8 million for the years ended August 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. We issue new shares of common stock upon exercise of stock options.
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units
The fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units (“nonvested shares”) is determined based on the closing bid price of the Company’s common stock on the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value of nonvested shares granted during the years ended August 31, 2006 and 2005 was $47.40 and $42.51, respectively. Nonvested shares were not granted during the year ended August 31, 2004.
49
The following table shows a summary of our nonvested shares as of August 31, 2006 as well as activity during the year then ended. The total fair value of shares vested during fiscal 2006, 2005, and 2004 was $0.4 million, $16,000, and $40,000, respectively.
Nonvested Shares | | Shares (000s) | | Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value |
---|
|
Nonvested at September 1, 2005 | | 135 | | $42.57 | |
Granted | | 38 | | 47.40 | |
Vested | | (10 | ) | 40.67 | |
Forfeited | | (3 | ) | 43.44 | |
|
| | |
Nonvested at August 31, 2006 | | 160 | | 43.82 | |
|
| | |
Comprehensive income, net of income taxes, was $37.2 million, $33.0 million, and $26.1 million for the years ended August 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
11. | Stockholder Rights Plan |
On June 19, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted a stockholder rights plan under which holders of common stock as of June 30, 2000 received preferred stock purchase rights as a dividend at the rate of one right per share. As amended in June 2004 and July 2006, each right initially entitles its holder to purchase one one-hundredth of a Series A preferred share at $175.00, subject to adjustment. Upon becoming exercisable, each right will allow the holder (other than the person or group whose actions have triggered the exercisability of the rights), under alternative circumstances, to buy either securities of the Company or securities of the acquiring company (depending on the form of the transaction) having a value of twice the then current exercise price of the rights.
With certain exceptions, each right will become exercisable only when a person or group acquires, or commences a tender or exchange offer for, 15% or more of our outstanding common stock. Rights will also become exercisable in the event of certain mergers or asset sales involving more than 50% of our assets or earning power. The rights will expire on June 15, 2014. The Board of Directors of the Company will review the plan at least once every three years to determine if the maintenance and continuance of the plan is still in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
We have a 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan (the “Plan”) available to substantially all of our employees. Employees can contribute up to a certain percentage of their base compensation as defined in the Plan. The Company matching contributions are subject to vesting requirements. Company contributions under the Plan totaled $2.5 million, $2.3 million, and $2.0 million for the years ended August 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
13. | Commitments and Contingencies |
Pursuant to an earn-out agreement executed in connection with the acquisition of certain assets of Health IQ in June 2005, we are obligated to pay the former stockholders of Health IQ additional purchase price equal to a percentage of revenues recognized from Health IQ’s programs in each of the fiscal quarters during the three-year period ending August 31, 2008.
50
In June 1994, a former employee whom we dismissed in February 1994 filed a “whistle blower” action on behalf of the United States government. Subsequent to its review of this case, the federal government determined not to intervene in the litigation. The employee sued Healthways, Inc. and our wholly-owned subsidiary, American Healthways Services, Inc. (“AHSI”), as well as certain named and unnamed medical directors and one named client hospital, West Paces Medical Center (“WPMC”), and other unnamed client hospitals.
Healthways, Inc. has since been dismissed as a defendant; however, the case is still pending against AHSI before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In addition, WPMC has settled claims filed against it as part of a larger settlement agreement that WPMC’s parent organization, HCA Inc., reached with the United States government.
The complaint alleges that AHSI, the client hospitals and the medical directors violated the federal False Claims Act by entering into certain arrangements that allegedly violated the federal anti-kickback statute and provisions of the Social Security Act prohibiting physician self-referrals. Although no specific monetary damage has been claimed, the plaintiff, on behalf of the federal government, seeks treble damages plus civil penalties and attorneys’ fees. The plaintiff also has requested an award of 30% of any judgment plus expenses. In February 2006, WPMC filed an arbitration claim seeking indemnification from us for certain costs and expenses incurred by it in connection with the case.
In the action by the former employee, discovery is substantially complete but no trial date has been set. The parties have had initial discussions regarding their respective positions in the case; however, no resolution of this case has been reached or can be assured prior to the case proceeding to trial. In the action by WPMC, initial arbitration proceedings were commenced during the third quarter of fiscal 2006.
We believe that we have conducted our operations in full compliance with applicable statutory requirements and that we have meritorious defenses to the claims made in the case and the related arbitration proceeding, and intend to contest the claims vigorously. Nevertheless, it is possible that resolution of these legal matters could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations in a particular financial reporting period. We believe that we will continue to incur legal expenses associated with the defense of these matters which may be material to our consolidated results of operations in a particular financial reporting period. However, we believe that any resolution of this case and all related matters will not have a material effect on our liquidity or financial condition.
We are also subject to other claims and suits that arise from time to time in the ordinary course of our business. While management currently believes that resolving claims against us, individually or in aggregate, will not have a material adverse impact on our financial position, our results of operations, or our cash flows, these matters are subject to inherent uncertainties, and management’s view of these matters may change in the future.
SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures About Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information,” establishes disclosure standards for segments of a company based on a management approach to defining operating segments. Through November 2003, we distinguished operating and reportable segments based upon the types of customers, hospitals or health plans, that contract for our services. In order to improve operational efficiency, in December 2003 we merged our operations into a single operating segment for purposes of presenting financial information and evaluating performance.
Our integrated Health and Care Support product line includes programs for various diseases, conditions, and wellness programs. It is impracticable for us to report revenues by program. Further, we
51
report revenues from our external customers on a consolidated basis since Health and Care Support services are the only service that we provide.
We derived approximately 38% of our fiscal 2006 revenues from two contracts that each comprised more than 10% of our revenues for the year. Revenues from each of these contracts individually totaled approximately 27% and 11%, respectively, of fiscal 2006 revenues. In fiscal 2005 and 2004, these same two contracts each comprised more than 10% of revenues for the year, comprising in the aggregate approximately 38% and 44%, respectively, of our fiscal 2005 and fiscal 2004 revenues.
On September 30, 2006, we terminated an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated May 30, 2006 with LifeMasters Supported SelfCare, Inc. (“LifeMasters”) and entered into a Merger Termination and Release Agreement which provides for, among other things, a mutual release of claims and a payment of $1.5 million from LifeMasters to reimburse us for certain of our expenses.
On October 11, 2006, we entered into a stock purchase agreement with Axia, a national provider of preventive health and wellness programs, to purchase all of Axia’s outstanding shares of capital stock for approximately $450 million, subject to adjustment for Axia’s indebtedness, working capital, and cash balance at closing. Of the purchase price, $35 million will be held in escrow until December 31, 2007 to satisfy any potential indemnification claims. An additional $9 million of the purchase price will be held in escrow to satisfy a portion of certain potential earnout obligations. We expect the acquisition to close during December 2006, subject to satisfaction of the closing conditions in the stock purchase agreement, including receipt of required regulatory approvals. We currently anticipate that the acquisition will be financed through a combination of cash on hand and committed bank debt.
52
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the Company) as of August 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended August 31, 2006. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries at August 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended August 31, 2006, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 1 and Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company adopted SFAS 123(R), Share-Based Payment, effective September 1, 2005.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated November 13, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Nashville, Tennessee
November 13, 2006
53
Quarterly Financial Information (unaudited):
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
Fiscal 2006 | First | | Second | | Third | | Fourth | |
---|
|
Revenues | | | $ | 90,592 | | $ | 100,021 | | $ | 106,820 | | $ | 114,876 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross margin | | | $ | 26,747 | | $ | 29,162 | | $ | 33,238 | | $ | 42,000 | |
Income before income taxes | | | $ | 10,706 | | $ | 12,161 | | $ | 15,481 | | $ | 22,811 | |
Net income | | | $ | 6,456 | | $ | 7,333 | | $ | 9,335 | | $ | 14,027 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic earnings per share (1) | | | $ | 0.19 | | $ | 0.21 | | $ | 0.27 | | $ | 0.41 | |
Diluted earnings per share (1) | | | $ | 0.18 | | $ | 0.20 | | $ | 0.26 | | $ | 0.38 | |
|
Fiscal 2005 | First | | Second | | Third | | Fourth | |
---|
|
Revenues | | | $ | 71,186 | | $ | 75,337 | | $ | 78,357 | | $ | 87,624 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross margin | | | $ | 25,214 | | $ | 27,205 | | $ | 27,426 | | $ | 27,406 | |
Income before income taxes | | | $ | 12,937 | | $ | 13,953 | | $ | 14,111 | | $ | 13,793 | |
Net income | | | $ | 7,762 | | $ | 8,441 | | $ | 8,536 | | $ | 8,344 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic earnings per share (1) | | | $ | 0.24 | | $ | 0.26 | | $ | 0.26 | | $ | 0.25 | |
Diluted earnings per share (1) | | | $ | 0.22 | | $ | 0.24 | | $ | 0.24 | | $ | 0.23 | |
| (1) | We calculated earnings per share for each of the quarters based on the weighted average number of shares and dilutive options outstanding for each period. Accordingly, the sum of the quarters may not necessarily be equal to the full year income per share. |
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
Not applicable.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Management, including the principal executive officer and principal financial officer, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies and procedures may deteriorate.
54
Management has performed an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2006 based on criteria established by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”), Internal Controls - Integrated Framework, and believes that the COSO framework is a suitable framework for such an evaluation. Management has concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of August 31, 2006.
Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm that audited the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the year ended August 31, 2006, has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting which is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We have performed an evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this report of the effectiveness of our “disclosure controls and procedures” (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ), under the supervision and with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer. Based upon our evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.
There have been no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ended August 31, 2006 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
55
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries
We have audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting, that Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, management’s assessment that Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2006 is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on the COSO criteria. Also, in our opinion, Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of August 31, 2006, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Healthways, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of August 31, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended August 31, 2006 and our report dated November 13, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Nashville, Tennessee
November 13, 2006
56
Item 9B. Other Information
Not applicable.
57
PART III
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
Information concerning our directors, audit committee financial experts, code of ethics, and compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act will be included in our Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held February 2, 2007, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14a-6(c), and is incorporated herein by reference.
Pursuant to General Instruction G(3), information concerning our executive officers is included in Part I, under the caption “Executive Officers of the Registrant” of this Form 10-K.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Information required by this item will be contained in our Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held February 2, 2007, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14a-6(c), and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
Information required by this item will be contained in our Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held February 2, 2007, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14a-6(c), and is incorporated herein by reference
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Information required by this item will be contained in our Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held February 2, 2007, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14a-6(c), and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services
Information required by this item will be contained in our Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held February 2, 2007, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14a-6(c), and is incorporated herein by reference.
58
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
(a) | The following documents are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K: |
1. The financial statements filed as part of this report are included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
2. We have omitted all Financial Statement Schedules because they are not required under the instructions to the applicable accounting regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission or the information to be set forth therein is included in the financial statements or in the notes thereto.
| 3.1 | Restated Certificate of Incorporation for Healthways, Inc., as amended |
| 3.2 | Bylaws, as amended [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Form 10-Q of the Company’s fiscal quarter ended February 29, 2004] |
| 4.1 | Article IV of the Company's Restated Certificate of Incorporation (included in Exhibit 3.1) |
| 4.2 | Rights Agreement, dated June 19, 2000, between American Healthways, Inc. and SunTrust Bank, including the Form of Rights Certificate (Exhibit A), the Form of Summary of Rights (Exhibit B) and the Form of Certificate of Amendment to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of American Healthways, Inc. (Exhibit C) [incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 21, 2000] |
| 4.3 | Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement, dated June 15, 2004, between American Healthways, Inc. and SunTrust Bank [incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 17, 2004] |
| 4.4 | Amendment No. 2 to Rights Agreement, dated July 19, 2006, between Healthways, Inc. and SunTrust Bank [incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 19, 2006] |
| 10.1 | Second Amended and Restated Revolving Credit Loan Agreement between the Company and SunTrust Bank as Administrative Agent, Regions Bank and Bank of America, N.A. as Co-Documentation Agents, and National City Bank and U.S. Bank, N.A. as Co-Syndication Agents dated September 15, 2005 including Form Revolving Credit Note, Form Swingline Note, and Form Subsidiary Guarantee Agreement [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Current Report on Form 8-K of the Company dated September 22, 2005] |
| 10.2 | Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among American Healthways, Inc., AH Mergersub, Inc., StatusOne Health Systems, Inc., and certain stockholders of StatusOne Health Systems, Inc. dated as of September 5, 2003 [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 9, 2003] |
| 10.3 | Office Lease by and between Healthways, Inc. and Highwoods/Tennessee Holdings, L.P., dated as of May 4, 2006 [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 5, 2006] |
59
| 10.4 | Merger Termination and Release Agreement by and among Healthways, Inc., Lime Acquisition Corp., and LifeMasters Supported SelfCare, Inc., dated as of September 30, 2006 [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 3, 2006] |
Management Contracts and Compensatory Plans
| 10.5 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Thomas G. Cigarran [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.6 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Robert E. Stone [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.7 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Ben R. Leedle [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.8 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Mary D. Hunter [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.9 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Mary A. Chaput [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.10 | Employment Agreement dated November 20, 2001 between the Company and Henry D. Herr, [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 10-Q of the Company’s fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2001] |
| 10.11 | Amendment to Employment Agreement dated October 7, 2005 between the Company and Henry D. Herr [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Current Report on Form 8-K of the Company dated October 12, 2005] |
| 10.12 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Donald B. Taylor [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.13 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and James Pope, MD [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
| 10.14 | Employment Agreement dated September 5, 2003 between the Company and Matthew Kelliher [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 10-Q of the Company’s fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2003] |
| 10.15 | Employment Agreement dated February 1, 2006 between the Company and Robert L. Chaput [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 1, 2006] |
60
| 10.16 | Capital Accumulation Plan, as amended and restated [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 15, 2005] |
| 10.17 | 1991 Employee Stock Incentive Plan, as amended [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to Form 10-K of the Company for its fiscal year ended August 31, 1992] |
| 10.18 | Amendment to 1991 Employee Stock Incentive Plan |
| 10.19 | Form of Indemnification Agreement by and among the Company and the Company's directors [incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 33-41119)] |
| 10.20 | 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended |
| 10.21 | 2001 Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan |
| 10.22 | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the Company’s 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended |
| 10.23 | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the Company’s Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Option Plan |
| 10.24 | Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement under the Company’s 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended |
| 10.25 | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (for Directors) under the Company’s 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended |
| 11 | Earnings Per Share Reconciliation |
| 23 | Consent of Ernst & Young LLP |
| 31.1 | Certification pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 made by Ben R. Leedle, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer |
| 31.2 | Certification pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 made by Mary A. Chaput, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| 32.1 | Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of |
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 made by Ben R. Leedle, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer and Mary A. Chaput, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Refer to Item 15(a)(3) above.
61
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
HEALTHWAYS, INC.
| November 13, 2006 | By: /s/ Ben R. Leedle, Jr. |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature | | Title | | Date |
| | | | |
/s/ Ben R. Leedle, Jr. | | President, Chief Executive | | November 13, 2006 |
Ben R. Leedle, Jr. | | Officer, and Director (Principal Executive Officer) | | |
/s/ Mary A. Chaput | | Executive Vice President and Chief | | November 13, 2006 |
Mary A. Chaput | | Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) | | |
/s/ Alfred Lumsdaine | | Senior Vice President and Corporate | | November 13, 2006 |
Alfred Lumsdaine /s/ Thomas G. Cigarran | | Controller (Principal Accounting Officer) Chairman of the Board and Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Thomas G. Cigarran | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Frank A. Ehmann | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Frank A. Ehmann | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Henry D. Herr | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Henry D. Herr | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ C. Warren Neel | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
C. Warren Neel | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ William C. O’Neil, Jr. | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
William C. O'Neil, Jr. | | | | |
/s/ Jay C. Bisgard | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Jay C. Bisgard | | | | |
/s/ John W. Ballantine | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
John W. Ballantine | | | | |
/s/ Mary Jane England, M.D. | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Mary Jane England | | | | |
| | | | |
/s/ Alison Taunton-Rigby | | Director | | November 13, 2006 |
Alison Taunton-Rigby | | | | |
62