Quiver Quantitative

Risk Factors Dashboard

Once a year, publicly traded companies issue a comprehensive report of their business, called a 10-K. A component mandated in the 10-K is the ‘Risk Factors’ section, where companies disclose any major potential risks that they may face. This dashboard highlights all major changes and additions in new 10K reports, allowing investors to quickly identify new potential risks and opportunities.

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - ENSG

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Item 1A., Risk Factors.

A brief overview of each of our revenue sources is as follows:

Medicaid — Medicaid is a program financed by state funds and matching federal funds administered by the states and their political subdivisions, and often go by state-specific names, such as Medi-Cal in California and the Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment System in Arizona. Medicaid programs generally provide health benefits for qualifying individuals and may supplement Medicare benefits for the disabled and for persons aged 65 and older meeting financial eligibility requirements. Medicaid reimbursement formulas are established by each state with the approval of the federal government in accordance with federal guidelines. Seniors who enter skilled nursing facilities as private pay clients can become eligible for Medicaid once they have substantially depleted their assets. Medicaid is generally the largest source of funding for most skilled nursing facilities.

Medicaid reimbursement varies from state to state and is based upon a number of different systems, including cost-based, prospective payment; case mixed adjusted payments and negotiated rate systems. Rates are subject to a state’s annual budgetary requirements and funding, statutory and regulatory changes and interpretations and rulings by individual state agencies and State Plan Amendments approved by CMS. However, given that most states are required to have balanced budgets and Medicaid is frequently their largest program, many states have implemented or might consider implementing various strategies to manage Medicaid expenses.

Medicaid typically covers patients that require standard room and board services and provides reimbursement rates that are generally lower than rates earned from other sources. We monitor our payor mix to measure the level received from each payor across each of our business units. We intend to continue to focus on enhancing our care offerings to accommodate more high acuity patients.

Table of Contents

We received revenues from Medicaid in all the states in which we operate, with approximately 90% coming from Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Texas, Utah and Washington. As a result, we are sensitive to potential changes in state-based revenue programs, such as Medicaid, as well as regulatory, economic, environmental, and competitive changes in those states. While the Medicaid spending of each state reflects its own population size, trends and public health challenges, the broad trend across our largest states in 2024 was either stable or increasing rate growth. With some states even electing to make the temporary Covid funding part of their long term budgets. Over the long term, Medicaid spending is expected to increase across all states as a result of the increases in costs of care and the increase in population eligible for Medicaid benefits. For example, California projected its Medicaid spending to increase from current levels through the state’s 2028-2029 budget period. However, the increased Medicaid spending may not directly translate into rate increases for care. Additionally, we have seen that some state budgets continue to be pressured by budget shortfalls. For example, in Colorado, recent budget shortfalls have caused the state to propose provider compensation that is stagnant despite increases in costs for the 2025-2026 budget period. This is an area we monitor closely and will continue to follow as it affects the success of our independent facilities and overall business.

Medicare — Medicare is a federal program that provides healthcare benefits to individuals who are 65 years of age or older or are disabled. To achieve and maintain Medicare certification, a skilled nursing facility must sign a Medicare provider agreement and meet the CMS “Conditions of Participation” on an ongoing basis, as determined in periodic facility inspections or “surveys” conducted primarily by the state licensing agency in the state where the facility is located. Medicare pays for inpatient skilled nursing facility services under the prospective payment system (PPS). Under PPS, facilities are paid a predetermined amount per patient, per day, for certain services. Medicare Part A skilled nursing facility coverage is limited to 100 days per episode of illness for those beneficiaries who require daily care following discharge from an acute care hospital.

For Medicare beneficiaries who qualify for the Medicare Part A coverage, rehabilitation services are included in the per diem payment. For beneficiaries who do not meet the coverage criteria for Part A services, rehabilitation services may qualify for the services to be provided under Medicare Part B.

Managed Care and Private Insurance — Managed care patients consist of individuals who are insured by certain third-party entities, or who are Medicare beneficiaries who have assigned their Medicare benefits to a managed care organization plan. Another type of insurance, long-term care insurance, is also becoming more available to consumers, but is not expected to contribute significantly to industry revenues in the near term.

Private and Other Payors — Private and other payors consist primarily of individuals, family members or other third parties who directly pay for the services we provide.

Rental Revenue — Real estate rental revenue is generated by leasing post-acute care properties that we acquired to healthcare operators under triple-net lease arrangements, whereby the tenant is solely responsible for the costs related to the property, including property taxes, insurance and maintenance and repair costs, subject to certain exceptions.

The following charts sets forth our total service revenue by payor source generated by our consolidated operations and skilled services segment as a percentage of total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively:

Table of Contents

CONSOLIDATED SERVICE REVENUE BY PAYOR

SKILLED SERVICES REVENUE BY PAYOR

Payor Sources as a Percentage of Skilled Services — The following table sets forth our percentage of skilled nursing patient days by payor source:

Table of Contents

REIMBURSEMENT FOR SPECIFIC SERVICES

Reimbursement for Skilled Services — Skilled nursing facility revenue is primarily derived from Medicaid, Medicare, managed care and private payors. Our skilled nursing operations provide Medicaid-covered services to eligible individuals consisting of nursing care, room and board and social services. In addition, states may, at their option, cover other services such as physical, occupational and speech therapies.

Historically, adjustments to reimbursement under Medicare and Medicaid have had a significant effect on our revenue and results of operations. Recently enacted, pending and proposed legislation and administrative rulemaking at the federal and state levels could have similar effects on our business. Efforts to impose reduced reimbursement rates, greater discounts and more stringent cost controls by government and other payors are expected to continue for the foreseeable future and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, any delay or default by the federal or state governments in making Medicare and/or Medicaid reimbursement payments could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Reimbursement for Rehabilitation Therapy Services — Rehabilitation therapy revenue is primarily received from private pay, managed care and Medicare for services provided at skilled nursing operations and senior living operations. The payments are based on negotiated patient per diem rates or a negotiated fee schedule based on the type of service rendered.

Reimbursement for Senior Living — Senior living facility revenue is primarily derived from private pay patients at rates we established, with the secondary source of revenue derived from state-specific programs such as Medicaid.

Reimbursement for Other Ancillary Services — Other ancillary revenue, such as mobile diagnostics and medical transportation, is primarily derived from Medicare Part B, Medicaid, managed care and private payors at rates we establish based upon the services we provide and market conditions in the area of operation.

RENTAL REVENUE

Rental revenue from third-party rental property tenants — Standard Bearer's owned properties are leased pursuant to non-cancelable operating leases, generally with an initial term of 10 to 20 years. All of the leases for post-acute care healthcare properties contain renewal options. The leases provide for fixed minimum base rent during the initial and renewal periods. Standard Bearer's leases contain provisions for specified annual increases over the rents of the prior year and those increases are generally calculated based on the Consumer Price Index.

Each lease is a triple net lease which requires the lessee to pay all taxes, insurance, maintenance and repairs, capital and non-capital expenditures and other costs necessary in the operations of the facilities. In addition, Standard Bearer's leases with third-parties are typically structured as master leases. The master leases consist of multiple leases, each with its own pool of properties, that have varying maturities and diversity in property geography.

If a lessee makes payments for taxes and insurance directly to a third-party on our behalf, we are required to exclude these payments from variable payments and from revenue recognition in our consolidated statements of income. Otherwise, tenant reimbursements paid to us for taxes and insurance are classified as additional rental revenue recognized by us on a gross basis.

Rental revenue from our independent subsidiaries — Rental revenue from our independent subsidiaries is based on mutually agreed-upon base rents that are subject to change from time to time. Intercompany revenue is eliminated in consolidation, along with the corresponding intercompany rent expenses of the related healthcare facilities.

COMPETITION

The post-acute care industry is highly competitive, and we expect that the industry will become increasingly competitive in the future. The industry is highly fragmented and characterized by numerous local and regional providers, in addition to large national providers that have achieved geographic diversity and economies of scale. Our independent subsidiaries also compete with inpatient rehabilitation facilities and long-term acute care hospitals. Increasingly, we are competing with home health and community-based providers who have developed programs designed to provide services to seniors outside a facility-based setting, potentially decreasing the time they need the higher level of care provided in a skilled nursing facility. Competitiveness may vary significantly from location to location, depending upon factors such as the number of competing facilities, availability of services, expertise of staff, and the physical appearance and amenities of each location. We believe that the primary competitive factors in the post-acute care industry are:

Table of Contents

•ability to attract and to retain qualified management and caregivers;

•reputation and achievements of quality healthcare outcomes;

•attractiveness and location of facilities;

•the expertise and commitment of the management team and employees; and

•community value, including amenities and ancillary services.

We seek to compete effectively in each market by establishing a reputation within the local community as the “operation of choice.” This means that the operation leaders are generally free to discern and address the unique needs and priorities of healthcare professionals, customers and other stakeholders in the local community or market, and then create a superior service offering and reputation for that particular community or market that is calculated to encourage prospective customers and referral sources to choose or recommend the operation.

Increased competition could limit our ability to attract and retain patients, maintain or increase rates or to expand our business. Some of our competitors have greater financial and other resources than we have, may have greater brand recognition and may be more established in their respective communities than we are. Competing companies may also offer newer facilities or different programs or services than we offer, and may therefore, attract individuals who are currently patients of our facilities, potential patients of our facilities, or who are otherwise receiving our healthcare services. Other competitors may have lower expenses or other competitive advantages than us and, therefore, provide services at lower prices than we offer.

Our other services, such as senior living facilities and other ancillary services, also compete with local, regional, and national companies. The primary competitive factors in these businesses are similar to those for our skilled nursing facilities and include reputation, cost of services, quality of clinical services, responsiveness to patient/resident needs, location and the ability to provide support in other areas such as third-party reimbursement, information management and patient recordkeeping.

Our Standard Bearer segment competes for real property investments with healthcare providers, healthcare-related REITs, real estate partnerships, banks, private equity funds, venture capital funds and other investors. Some of these competitors are significantly larger and have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than us. Our ability to compete successfully for real property investments will be determined by numerous factors, including our ability to identify suitable acquisition targets, our ability to negotiate acceptable terms for any such acquisition and our cost of capital in the event an acquisition requires debt or equity financing.

OUR COMPETITIVE STRENGTHS

We believe that we are well positioned to benefit from the ongoing changes within our industry. We believe that our ability to acquire, integrate and improve our facilities is a direct result of the following key competitive strengths:

Experienced and Dedicated Employees — We believe that our independent subsidiaries' employees are among the best in their respective industries. We believe each of our independent subsidiaries is led by an experienced and caring leadership team, including dedicated front-line care staff, who participates daily in the clinical and operational improvement of their individual operations. We have been successful in attracting, training, incentivizing and retaining a core group of outstanding business and clinical leaders to spearhead our independent subsidiaries. These leaders operate as separate local businesses. With broad local control, these talented leaders and their care staffs are able to quickly meet the needs of their patients and residents, employees and local communities, without waiting for permission to act or being bound to a “one-size-fits-all” corporate strategy.

Unique Incentive Programs — We believe that our employee compensation programs are unique within the industry. Employee stock options and performance bonuses, based on achieving target clinical quality, cultural, compliance and financial benchmarks, represent a significant component of total compensation for our operational leaders. We believe that these compensation programs assist us in encouraging our leaders and key employees to act with a shared ownership mentality. Furthermore, our leaders are motivated to help local operations within a defined “cluster” and "market," which is a group of geographically proximate operations that share clinical best practices, real-time financial data and other resources and information.

Table of Contents

Staff and Leadership Development — We have a culture that believes ongoing education, training and professional development is essential. Accordingly, our operational leaders participate in regular training. Most participate in training sessions at Ensign University, our in-house educational system. Other training opportunities are generally offered via on-demand training tools, including podcasts. In addition, we offer weekly cultural and interactive educational topics including leadership development, our values, updates on Medicaid and Medicare billing requirements, updates on new regulations or legislation, infection control, emerging healthcare service alternatives and other relevant clinical, business and industry specific coursework. We believe that our commitment to, and substantial investment in, ongoing education will further strengthen the quality of our operational leaders and staff, and the quality of the care they provide to our patients and residents.

Innovative Service Center Approach — We do not maintain a corporate headquarters; rather, we operate service centers to support the efforts of each operation. Our Service Center is a dedicated service organization that acts as a resource and provides centralized information technology, human resources, accounting, payroll, legal, risk management, educational and other back-office support services, so that local leaders can focus on delivering top-quality care and efficient business operations. Our Service Center approach allows individual operations to function with the strength, synergies and economies of scale found in larger organizations, but without what we believe are the disadvantages of a top-down management structure or corporate hierarchy. We believe our Service Center approach is unique within the industry, and allows us to preserve the “one-operation-at-a-time” focus and culture that has contributed to our success.

Proven Track Record of Successful Acquisitions — We have established a disciplined acquisition strategy that is focused on selectively acquiring operations within our target markets. Our acquisition strategy is driven by our operations team. Prospective leaders are included in the decision-making process and compensated as these acquired operations reach pre-established clinical quality and financial benchmarks, helping to ensure that we only undertake acquisitions that key leaders believe can become clinically sound and contribute to our financial performance.

As of December 31, 2024, we have expanded to 327 facilities with an aggregate of 33,547 operational skilled nursing beds and 3,088 senior living units, through both long-term leases and real estate purchases. We believe our experience in acquiring these operations and our demonstrated success in significantly improving their operations enables us to consider a broad range of acquisition targets. In addition, we believe we have developed expertise in transitioning newly acquired operations to our unique organizational culture and systems, which enables us to acquire operations with limited disruption to patients, residents and operating staff, while significantly improving quality of care. We have also constructed new facilities to target demand, which exists for high-end healthcare facilities when we determine that market conditions justify the cost of new construction in some of our markets.

Successful Real Estate Investment Strategy — As part of our Standard Bearer segment, we maintain a real estate portfolio of long-term healthcare facilities diversified by geographic location and operated by a diverse group of established healthcare providers. We are focused on selectively acquiring real estate properties based on our industry experience and opportunistic strategy, which we believe provides us with greater investment and purchasing opportunities. Due to our credit strength, we have the ability to acquire large portfolios of real estate properties; a portion of which can be managed and operated by our independent subsidiaries and their established healthcare leaders and a portion of which can be leased to third parties.

As of December 31, 2024, our real estate portfolio consists of 129 owned facilities, which include properties leased to and operated by third parties and properties we managed and operated. We believe our real estate investment strategy has allowed us to accumulate a portfolio that aids our healthcare operators in improving performance and generating additional returns through leases with third parties.

Reputation for Quality Care — We believe that we have achieved a reputation for high-quality and cost-effective care and services to our patients and residents within the communities we serve. We believe that our achievement of quality outcomes enhances our reputation for quality, that when coupled with the integrated services that we offer, allows us to attract patients that require more intensive and medically complex care and generally result in higher reimbursement rates than lower acuity patients.

Table of Contents

Community Focused Approach — We view our services primarily as a local, community-based business. Our local leadership-centered management culture enables each operation's nursing support staff and leaders to meet the unique needs of their patients and local communities. We believe that our commitment to this “one-operation-at-a-time” philosophy helps to ensure that each operation, its patients, their family members and the community will receive the individualized attention they need. By serving our patients, their families, the community and our fellow healthcare professionals, we strive to make each individual business the operation of choice in its local community.

We further believe that when choosing a healthcare provider, consumers usually choose a person or people they know and trust, rather than a corporation or business. Therefore, rather than pursuing a traditional organization-wide branding strategy, we actively seek to develop the operations brand at the local level, serving and marketing one-on-one to caregivers, our patients, their families, the community and our fellow healthcare professionals in the local market.

Investment in Information Technology — We utilize information technology that enables our operational leaders to access, and to share with their peers, both clinical and financial performance data in real time. Armed with relevant and current information, our operation leaders and their management teams are able to share best practices and the latest information, adjust to challenges and opportunities on a timely basis, improve quality of care, mitigate risk and improve both clinical outcomes and financial performance. We have also invested in specialized healthcare technology systems to assist our nursing and support staff. We have installed software and touch-screen interface systems in each operation to enable our clinical staff to more efficiently monitor and deliver patient care and record patient information. We believe these systems have improved the quality of our medical and billing records, while improving the productivity of our staff.

OUR GROWTH STRATEGY

We believe that the following strategies are primarily responsible for our growth to date, and will continue to drive the growth of our business:

Grow Talent Base and Develop Future Leaders — Our primary growth strategy is to expand our talent base and develop future leaders. A key component of our organizational culture is our belief that strong local leadership is a primary key to the success of each operation. While we believe that significant acquisition opportunities exist, we have generally followed a disciplined approach to growth that permits us to acquire an operation only when we believe, among other things, that we will have qualified leadership for that operation. To develop these leaders, we have a rigorous “CEO-in-Training Program” that attracts proven business leaders from various industries and backgrounds, and provides them the knowledge and hands-on training they need to successfully lead one of our independent subsidiaries. We generally have between 55 and 65 prospective administrators progressing through the various stages of this training program, which is generally much more rigorous, hands-on and intensive than the minimum 1,000 hours of training mandated by the licensing requirements of most states where we do business. Once administrators are licensed and assigned to an operation, they continue to learn and develop in our operational Chief Executive Officer Program (CEO Program), which facilitates the continued development of these talented business leaders into outstanding operational chief executive officers, through regular peer review, our leadership development tools and on-the-job training.

In addition, our Chief Operating Officer Program (COO Program) recruits and trains highly qualified Directors of Nursing to lead the clinical programs in our operations. Working together with their operational CEO and/or administrator, other key operational leaders and front-line staff, these experienced nurses manage delivery of care and other clinical personnel and programs to optimize both clinical outcomes and employee and patient satisfaction.

Increase Mix of High Acuity Patients — Many skilled nursing facilities are serving an increasingly larger population of patients who require a high level of skilled nursing and rehabilitative care, whom we refer to as high acuity patients, as a result of government and other payors seeking lower-cost alternatives to traditional acute-care hospitals. We generally receive higher reimbursement rates for providing care for these medically complex patients. In addition, many of these patients require therapy and other rehabilitative services, which we are able to provide as part of our integrated service offerings. Where higher complex services are medically necessary and prescribed by a patient's physician or other appropriate healthcare professional, we generally receive additional revenue in connection with the provision of those services. We believe that we can continue to attract high acuity patients to our operations by maintaining and enhancing our reputation for quality care and continuing our community focused approach.

Table of Contents

Focus on Organic Growth and Internal Operating Efficiencies — We plan to continue to grow organically by focusing on increasing patient occupancy within our existing operations.

Our overall occupancy is impacted significantly by the number of facilities acquired and the operational occupancy on the acquisition date. We historically have acquired operations with lower occupancy and skilled mix. Therefore, consolidated occupancy will vary significantly based on these factors. Throughout most of our history, our business is affected by seasonal fluctuations in occupancy and acuity, which are most prominent when comparing the summer and winter months of the calendar year.

We also believe we can generate organic growth by improving operating efficiencies and the quality of care at the patient level. By focusing on staff development, clinical systems and the efficient delivery of quality patient care, we believe we are able to deliver higher quality care at lower costs than many of our competitors.

Historically, we have achieved incremental occupancy and revenue growth by creating or expanding clinical service offerings in existing operations. For example, by expanding clinical programs to provide outpatient therapy services in many markets, we are able to increase revenue while spreading the fixed costs of maintaining these programs over a larger patient base. Outpatient therapy has also proven to be an effective marketing tool, raising the visibility of our facilities in their local communities and enhancing the reputation of our facilities with short-stay rehabilitation patients.

Add New Facilities and Expand Existing Facilities — One of our growth strategies includes the acquisition of new and existing facilities from third parties and the expansion and upgrade of current facilities. In the near term, we plan to take advantage of the fragmented skilled nursing industry by acquiring operations within select geographic markets and may consider the construction of new facilities. In addition, we have targeted facilities that we believed were performing and operations that were underperforming, where we believed we could improve service delivery, occupancy rates and cash flow. With experienced leaders in place at the community level and demonstrated success in significantly improving operating conditions at acquired facilities, we believe that we are well positioned for continued growth. While the integration of underperforming facilities generally has a negative short-term effect on overall operating margins, these facilities are typically accretive to earnings within 12 to 18 months following their acquisition.

Standard Bearer Portfolio Growth — Our execution of this strategy hinges on our ability to successfully identify, secure and consummate beneficial transactions. We have a proven track record of acquiring properties that we have determined are investment opportunities and develop these into thriving properties that are well-suited for operational purposes. We then use these properties for our skilled nursing or senior living operations, or we lease the properties to other long-term care facility operators. We expect that our REIT structure will allow us to expand our real estate footprint while bringing the best operational practices to our own and other operators in the industry.

Table of Contents

HUMAN CAPITAL

At December 31, 2024, we had approximately 39,300 full-time equivalent employees who were employed by our Service Center and our independent subsidiaries. For the year ended December 31, 2024, approximately 60.0% of our total expenses were payroll related. Periodically, market forces, which vary by region, require that we increase wages in excess of general inflation or in excess of increases in reimbursement rates we receive. We believe that we staff appropriately, focusing primarily on the acuity level and day-to-day needs of our patients and residents. In most of the states where we operate, our skilled nursing facilities are subject to state mandated minimum staffing ratios, so our ability to reduce costs by decreasing staff, notwithstanding decreases in acuity or need, is limited and subject to government audits and penalties in some states. We seek to manage our labor costs by improving staff retention, improving operating efficiencies, maintaining competitive wage rates and benefits and reducing reliance on overtime compensation and temporary nursing agency services. The Service Center's Chief Human Capital Officer, together with the Unity Committee, oversee the following human capital initiatives:

Our Culture — The operation of our skilled nursing and senior living facilities requires a large number of highly skilled healthcare professionals and support staff. Our employees are at the heart of our Company and we are committed to their health, professional development and workplace satisfaction.

Compensation and Benefits — The healthcare industry as a whole has been experiencing shortages of qualified professional clinical staff. We believe that our ability to attract and retain qualified professional clinical staff stems from our ability to offer attractive wage and benefits packages, a high level of employee training, an empowered culture that provides incentives for individual efforts and a quality work environment.

Unity — Our commitment to inclusion is deeply rooted in our core values, including Love One Another, where we foster a welcoming and supportive environment for residents and their families and ensure that every individual—whether resident, family member, or team member—feels valued, informed, and comfortable to work together. Our commitment is to provide equal opportunity and fair treatment to all individuals based on merit and without discrimination. Our teams enable us to be a more relevant, competitive, and resilient organization. These efforts are supported by our Unity Committee, a multidisciplinary group led by our Chief Executive Officer.

Training and Development — We provide training and development to all employees. We have many training programs at all levels such as our CEO in Training, Director of Nursing in Training, Director of Rehab in Training, nursing certified assistant schools, weekly culture trainings, boot camps and annual meetings, where we focus on both career and professional development.

Social Sustainability — We continuously work towards bridging the gap between what the healthcare system currently provides and the basic needs of individuals. We aim to have an enduring impact on the communities in which we live and work. Elevate Charities has three unique funds: Heritage Fund, Heritage Scholarship Fund and the Emergency Fund.

The Heritage Fund and the Heritage Scholarship Fund engage in a mission to enhance the quality of life for seniors in our communities through caring service, fulfilling essential needs and providing education to caregivers. The Heritage Fund helps the caregiver identify specific and practical ways to meet the needs of those under their care. This can help provide a better life, improved experience and greater satisfaction for our aging population. The financial support provided by the Heritage Fund benefits seniors directly. In addition, the Heritage Scholarship Fund helps qualified clinical professionals who may not be able to afford to advance in the field of long-term care. Through grants and scholarships, the fund helps these qualified professionals gain the education needed to advance in the field of senior-focused healthcare. Since 2018, we have partnered with public charities who have awarded 244 scholarships to employees in our workforce.

Lastly, the Emergency Fund is a way of passing the hat to help long term care staff whose lives are affected by tragedy. This program is funded for our team members by our team members. To date, the Emergency Fund has distributed over 19,400 grants totaling almost $20.6 million to members of our independent subsidiaries in their time of need.

Table of Contents

For additional information on human capital matters, please see our most recent proxy statement or ESG report, each of which is available on our website at www.ensigngroup.net. For additional information on Elevate Charities, please visit www.elevatecharities.org. The information contained in, or that can be accessed through, either of the foregoing websites does not constitute a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

GOVERNMENT REGULATION

General

Healthcare is an area of extensive and frequent regulatory change. Changes in the law or new interpretations of existing laws may have a significant impact on our revenue, costs and business operations. Our independent subsidiaries that provide healthcare services are subject to federal, state and local laws relating to, among other things, licensure, quality and adequacy of care, physical plant requirements, life safety, personnel and operating policies. In addition, these same subsidiaries are subject to federal and state laws that govern billing and reimbursement, relationships with vendors, business relationships with physicians and workplace protection for healthcare staff. Such laws include (but are not limited to) the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), the federal False Claims Act (FCA), the Stark Law and state corporate practice of medicine statutes.

Governmental and other authorities periodically inspect our independent subsidiaries to verify continued compliance with applicable regulations and standards. The operations must pass these inspections to remain licensed under state laws and to comply with Medicare and Medicaid provider agreements and applicable Conditions of Participation. In the ordinary course of business, federal or state regulatory authorities may issue notices to the operations alleging deficiencies in certain regulatory practices, which may require corrective action to regain and maintain compliance.

We believe that the regulatory environment surrounding the healthcare industry subjects providers to intense scrutiny. In the ordinary course of business, providers are subject to inquiries, investigations and audits by federal and state agencies related to compliance with participation and payment rules under government payment programs. These inquiries may originate from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office of the Inspector General (OIG), state Medicaid agencies, state Attorney Generals, local and state ombudsman offices and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Recovery Audit Contractors, among other agencies. In response to the inquiries, investigations and audits, federal and state agencies continue to impose citations for regulatory deficiencies and other regulatory penalties, including demands for refund of overpayments, expanded civil monetary penalties that extend over long periods of time and date back to incidents prior to surveyor visits, Medicare and Medicaid payment bans and terminations from those programs, which may be temporary or permanent in nature. We vigorously contest each such regulatory outcome when appropriate; however, there are significant legal and other expenses involved that consume our financial and personnel resources. Expansion of enforcement activity could adversely affect our business, financial condition or the results of operations.

Proposed, Anticipated and Recently Issued Rulemaking and Administrative Actions

The federal government, through CMS rulemaking, Presidential executive actions or Congressional legislation, and state and local governments have recently released the following proposed rulemaking or administrative actions that may have an impact on our independent Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) or Assisted Living Facilities (ALFs):

Biden-Harris Administration's Nursing Home Care Priorities — The Biden-Harris Administration sought reform around reimbursement, staffing levels, standards of care, increased transparency and public disclosure of ownership, and enhanced civil remedies as a means of enforcement against those facilities that do not satisfy CMS’s standards. Through rules that were proposed and finalized beginning 2023, including those highlighted below, the Biden-Harris Administration directed the government to exercise greater oversight of SNFs and ALFs receiving federal reimbursement. For example, the SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule grants CMS greater sanctioning authority for ongoing or persistent deficiencies in Medicare-participating SNFs. These increased sanctioning authorities will take effect in the 2025 federal fiscal year, beginning October 1, 2024. With the new administration, it currently is unknown whether any of these rules will be reduced in their scope or application, or whether they will be increased in any respects. The individuals anticipated to be nominated to serve as the Secretary of HHS and Director of CMS, respectively, have not yet provided any indication what their priorities of anticipated future actions would be in this area.

Table of Contents

Ownership Transparency Final Rule — CMS' final rule published in November 2023 requires SNFs to publicly disclose certain additional information regarding their ownership and managerial relationships, including the identity of any person or legal entity that: (1) exercises financial, operational, or managerial control over any facility or part of a facility, or provides services to a facility that include its policies and procedures or cash management services; (2) leases or subleases real property to the facility, or owns 5% or more of the real property’s total value; and (3) provides any management or administrative services (or consults regarding the same), or provides accounting or financial services to SNFs. The rule also expands ownership and control interest disclosures to include information about each member of the facilities governing body, individuals or entities serving as officers, directors, members, partners or managing employees, and a comprehensive breakdown of the organizational structure of any additional disclosable party that is not a natural person along with a description of their relationships with the facility. This rule’s disclosure requirements came into effect throughout 2024, with all SNFs required to comply by November of 2024.

Certain states have adopted laws reflecting their concerns regarding ownership transparency. For example, Iowa adopted laws requiring disclosure of ownership information not previously required for licensure to promote transparency in 2023. Additionally, in March 2024, the California Department of Health Care Access and Information of the California Health and Human Services Agency issued its notice of approval of regulatory action establishing policies and procedures that implement financial and ownership transparency requirements for California-licensed SNFs that are required by California law passed in 2021.

Federal Legislation — The Home and Community-Based Services (HCBS) Access Act (Access Act) was introduced in 2023 to expand access to and resources available for HCBS. The Access Act ensures that Medicaid funding is made available to individuals who provide direct home- and community-based care to adults over the age of 60 or people who have disabilities. This bill also provides financial resources for the training of these direct care providers, who are intended to provide services to the elderly or disabled that range from advocacy and community integration to transportation and daily assistance tasks ranging from bathing and laundry to meal preparation and housekeeping. As of the date of filing, no further action has been taken on the HCBS Access Act since its introduction and referral to the House of Representatives committees.

To qualify for the enhanced rate, a state must commit to initiatives aimed at improving the provision of services. As of the date of this filing, no action has been taken on the HCBS Relief Act since its introduction and referral to the Senate Committee on Finance.

State Legislation — Many states in which our independent subsidiaries operate have introduced or passed legislation that would create or change laws and regulations related to our business and industry.

In the past, California had discussed issuing proposed regulations on direct care spending requirements that may have affected our business and SNFs operating within that state.

California has also signed into law a bill that impacts the minimum wages of healthcare workers. While the existing requirement bill has not seen any traction, we anticipate a minimum spending bill could be proposed in the future, including the next California legislative session that begins in 2025.

On April 24, 2024, the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) announced that the Office of Health Care Affordability’s Board approved a statewide healthcare spending target of 3%, which represents a long-term reduction of current levels of statewide healthcare spending. The spending target will be phased in over time, initially starting at 3.5% for 2025 and 2026, the target will be lowered to 3.2% for 2027 and 2028 before ultimately reaching 3% for 2029 and beyond.

Final Rule Fiscal Year 2025 Skilled Nursing Facility Prospective Payment System (SNF PPS) — CMS released the final rule for the SNF PPS for FY 2025 (SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule) in July 2024 to update the Medicare payment rates within the SNF PPS and provide significant enhancements to CMS’s enforcement capabilities within nursing homes.

Table of Contents

This final rule results in a net 4.2% increase in SNF payments under Medicare Part A in fiscal year 2025, which started on October 1, 2024 and will run through September 30, 2025. The net increase is based on the SNF market basket of 3.0%, plus a 1.7% market basket forecast error adjustment, and a negative 0.5% productivity adjustment. This increase does not include the SNF VBP reductions for certain SNFs subject to the net reduction in payments under the SNF VBP. CMS also revised the SNF market basket base year from the 2018 base year to the current 2022 base year and updated the payment rates used under the SNF PPS based on the FY 2025 market basket increase factor, which is adjusted by both the productivity adjustment and forecast error correction. Within this rule, CMS also updated the SNF PPS wage index using core-based statistical areas (CBSAs) to reflect regional wage costs.

The SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule also includes significant enhancements to CMS’s enforcement capabilities within nursing homes, aiming to reinforce the safety and quality of care. The rule broadens CMS’s ability to use financial penalties to ensure sustained remediation of health and safety infractions, thereby motivating facilities to quickly comply with CMS regulations. The rule eliminates the restrictions of per instance (PI) for isolated violations or per day (PD) for ongoing non-compliance restrictions, allowing for more flexible imposition of both PD and PI penalties, which would not exceed statutory daily limits. This change is intended to provide CMS with enhanced tools to address violations more effectively and reflect the severity of the impact on residents’ health and safety. Additionally, the SNF PPS FY 2025 includes updates to the QRP to better account for social determinants of health, adding items to be reported regarding these social determinants of health—living situation, food, and utilities—in the minimum data set each SNF is required to report to CMS. The SNF PPS FY 2025 also contains an update to the SNF Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program, including how its measurements are retained or removed from use in evaluating quality of care, updates to technical measures so that measures can be updated using a sub-regulatory process, and administrative policies for updating and correcting data CMS relies on in calculating its measurements.

2025 Home Health and Hospice Payment Rules Affecting SNFs — CMS’s final payment rules for other modalities of care delivery also affect the operations of SNFs. The 2025 Home Health PPS Final Rule requires long-term care facilities, including SNFs, to make at least weekly reports to CMS regarding respiratory illnesses, including facility census, resident vaccination status for specified respiratory illnesses, confirmed resident cases and residents hospitalized from such illnesses.

Final Rule Fiscal Year 2024 SNF PPS — The SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule, which was effective October 1, 2023, updated the Medicare payment rates and modified the SNF QRP and the SNF VBP Program.

The SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule finalized the rates to be paid in fiscal year 2024, which started on October 1, 2023 and ran through September 30, 2024. The net effect of these changes was an overall 4.0% increase in payments to SNFs in FY 2024. The increase included a 6.4% net market basket update to the payment rates of 3.0%, plus a 3.6% market basket forecast error adjustment, less a 0.2% productivity adjustment, as well as a negative 2.3% in the FY 2024 SNF PPS rates due to the second phase of the Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) parity adjustment recalibration. In addition, this final rule also updates the SNF QRP for FY 2024 and future years, including the adoption of two new quality reporting measures, modification of one measure and removal of three measures resulting in public reporting of four QRP measures. Additionally, the SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule made changes to the SNF VBP Program, specifically adopting four new measures: the nursing staff turnover measure, the discharge function score measure, the long stay hospitalization measure per 1,000 resident days and the percent of residents experiencing one or more falls with a major injury (long stay); the existing SNF 30-day all-cause readmission measure (SNFRM) is replaced with the SNF within stay potentially preventable readmissions measure beginning in FY 2028.

SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule adopted the Nursing Staff Turnover (NST) measure for the SNF VBP program beginning with the FY 2026 program year. This is a structural measure that has been collected and publicly reported on Care Compare, and the measure assesses the stability of the staffing within a SNF using nursing staff turnover. The NST measure uses facility-reported, electronic data from CMS’ Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) system to calculate annual turnover rates for nursing staff, including RNs, LPNs, and nurse assistants. Facilities would begin reporting this measure in FY 2024, with payment effects beginning in FY 2026.

The NST measure looks at six consecutive quarters of data. It starts with a baseline quarter and the first two quarters of the performance period to identify eligible employees. Finally, the data from the sixth quarter is validated to identify gaps in days worked that began in the last 60 days of the fifth quarter used for the measure. The measure score is then calculated by comparing the total number of eligible employees with 60-day gaps in working during the specified periods. After submission, CMS may audit the data and if discrepancies are found, the consequences may include penalties, decreased ratings and suppression of metrics for the trailing 6 quarters.

Table of Contents

CMS Minimum Staffing Standards Final Rule — CMS issued its final rule establishing minimum staffing standards for skilled nursing facilities (Staffing Rule) in April 2024. The Staffing Rule contains three primary staffing requirements and provides for a staggered and phase implementation over the next several years following the Staffing Rule’s publication.

The initial phase, effective 90 days from the Staffing Rule's publication, which is August 8, 2024, requires facility self-assessment, which enhances the current assessment that all SNFs must perform and document annually and on an as-needed basis.

The second phase, effective within two years of the Staffing Rule's publication, which is May 2026 for non-rural facilities, requires that all SNFs have a registered nurse (RN) available to provide direct resident care onsite 24 hours per day, seven days per week (24/7). The rule states that administrative nurses may satisfy this requirement, provided that the nurse is available to provide direct resident care. In addition to the 24/7 RN, the Staffing Rule requires facilities to provide a minimum of 3.48 hours per resident per day (HPRD) of direct nursing care to residents.

The third phase, effective within three years of the Staffing Rule's publication, which is May 2027 for non-rural facilities, requires that the HPRD are satisfied through RNs providing 0.55 HPRD, nurse aides (NAs) providing 2.45 HPRD, and any combination of RNs, licensed practical nurses (LPNs), licensed vocational nurses (LVNs), or NAs to account for the final 0.48 HPRD.

The Staffing Rule finalized the hardship exemption for the HPRD requirements. A facility can qualify for a temporary hardship exemption from the new minimum staffing ratios and 24/7 RN onsite staffing requirement (the self-assessment standards must still be satisfied) if it is in an area where the supply of RN, NA, or total nursing staff is insufficient to meet the needs of that area. This exemption is based on the provider-to-population ratio for the nursing workforce, which must be at least 20% below the national average as calculated by CMS. Additionally, the Staffing Rule provides a one year extension of deadlines to rural facilities on Phases 2 and 3.

The Staffing Rule also enhances transparency for the use of Medicaid payments for facility services, referenced as Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting provisions (MIPTR). The MIPTR provisions within the Staffing Rule require States to report to CMS the percentage of Medicaid payments for nursing facility services spent on direct care workers and support staff, regardless of whether such payments are made under a fee-for-service or managed care model.

Prior to the publication of the Staffing Rule, two bills, named the Protecting America’s Seniors’ Access to Care Act and Protecting Rural Seniors’ Access to Care Act (one in the House and a companion bill in the Senate) were introduced to block the Staffing Rule from taking effect. Both bills have been referred to committee and are pending further action. It is uncertain if any of these bills or other legislative action will pass as well as their potential impact on the Staffing Rule.

Table of Contents

The Staffing Rule has been met with further opposition and proposed legislation to halt its implementation. On May 23, 2024, the American Health Care Association (AHCA) filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against HHS and CMS, alleging that the Staffing Rule exceeds the scope of CMS’s statutory authority and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The State of Texas brought suit and was granted consolidation of its lawsuit with AHCA's in the same venue arguing the rule is “arbitrary and capricious” and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Subsequently, over 20 additional states have filed similar suits in opposition to the rule, as well as industry groups including Leading Age and the South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations. On May 10, 2024, a joint resolution was introduced in the House of Representatives under the Congressional Review Act to overturn the Staffing Rule, which was referred to the House Ways and Means committee and its Subcommittee on Health on May 17, 2024, with no further action taken on the joint resolution since then. Related to the pending proposed legislation regarding the Staffing Rule, the Long-Term Care Workforce Support Act was introduced in both the Senate and House of Representatives in April of 2024 and both versions of the bill were subsequently referred to the Senate Committee on Finance and the House Ways and Means committee and its Subcommittee on Health, respectively, by April 19, 2024, with no action taken on either bill since then. These companion bills were introduced in order to increase the direct care workforce and improve pay, by increasing the federal match for Medicaid by up to 10% for each state across 10 years. The recent Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo ("Chevron" decision) gives courts greater authority to challenge federal agencies' statutory interpretations. As such, the Staffing Rule may see increased legal challenges under the new doctrine. (For further discussion of the Chevron case and its implications see "United States Supreme Court Decisions" section below.)

Medicare

Medicare presently accounts for approximately 25.9% of our skilled nursing services revenue year-to-date, being our second-largest revenue payor. The Medicare program and its reimbursement rates and rules are subject to frequent change. These include statutory and regulatory changes, rate adjustments, administrative or executive orders and government funding restrictions, all of which may materially adversely affect the rates at which Medicare reimburses us for our services. Budget pressures often lead the federal government to reduce or place limits on reimbursement rates under Medicare. Implementation of these and other types of measures has in the past, and could in the future, result in substantial reductions in our revenue and operating margins.

Patient-Driven Payment Model (PDPM) — The SNF PPS Rule included a case mix model called PDPM that focuses on the patient’s condition (clinically relevant factors) and resulting care needs to determine Medicare reimbursement. PDPM utilizes clinically relevant factors for determining Medicare payment by using diagnosis codes and other patient characteristics as the basis for patient classification. It also uses a sixth non-case mix component to cover utilization of SNFs' resources that do not vary depending on resident characteristics. PDPM is intended to achieve a more value-based, unified post-acute care payment system. For example, PDPM adjusts Medicare payments based on each aspect of a resident’s care. Under the SNF PPS PDPM system, the payment to SNFs and nursing homes is based heavily on the patient’s condition rather than the specific services provided by each SNF.

Skilled Nursing Facility - Quality Reporting Program (SNF QRP) — The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act) provided data reporting requirements for certain Post-Acute-Care (PAC) providers. If a SNF does not submit required quality data as required by the IMPACT Act, its payment rates are reduced by 2.0% for each such fiscal year, which may result in payment rates for a fiscal year being less than the preceding fiscal year.

The SNF QRP standardized patient assessment data elements. The SNF QRP applies to freestanding SNFs, SNFs affiliated with acute care facilities and all non-critical access hospital swing-bed rural hospitals. These data elements are the subject of frequent change and adjustment. CMS's rulemaking often identifies new data elements to be reported.

CMS revised the calculation of its five-star ratings for the Nursing Home Compare website. These six measures will be measured on a quarterly basis.

Table of Contents

These six new measures were included in the five-star rating starting in October 2022. In addition, CMS also implemented a planned increase to the quality measure reporting thresholds, increasing each threshold by one-half of the average improvement of quality measure scores since CMS last set quality measure thresholds. Going forward, CMS plans to implement similar rating threshold increases every six months.

CMS has continued to refine the QRP including various measurements such as the adoption of a process measure for influenza vaccination coverage among healthcare personnel within SNFs and a Discharge Function Score (DC Function) measure, which determines the functional condition of residents by examining the proportion of SNF residents who achieve or surpass a projected discharge functionality score. The assessment includes consideration of mobility and self-care, utilizing data from the Minimum Data Set (MDS). The DC Function will replace the current process and is scheduled to go into effect for the FY 2025 SNF QRP. The SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule also modified the SNF QRP’s Healthcare Professional (HCP) Covid Vaccine Measure. The measure will track the proportion of healthcare staff vaccinated for COVID-19 and have kept their vaccination status current per the CDC recommendations.

Under the SNF PPS FY 2024 Final Rule, CMS will adopt two measures for the SNF QRP starting in FY 2026. First, CMS will raise the Data Completion Thresholds for the MDS. SNFs must report required quality measure data and standardized resident assessment data gathered using the MDS for at least 90% of the assessments they submit to CMS. SNFs who fail to meet this requirement will be subject to a 2.0% reduction on their applicable fiscal year payment starting in FY 2026. Second, CMS will adopt the Patient/Resident COVID-19 Vaccine metric. This metric highlights the number of patient stays in which SNF patients received the COVID-19 vaccine.

CMS’s SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule adopts several updates to the SNF QRP aimed at enhancing the integration of social determinants of health (SDOH) into patient assessments and ensuring the accuracy of reported data. Starting in fiscal year 2027, CMS will introduce four new SDOH items related to living situation, food security, and utility access, and modify an existing item on transportation availability in the MDS. Additionally, CMS requires that SNFs participating in the SNF QRP undergo a data validation process similar to that already implemented in the SNF VBP Program. Also beginning in fiscal year 2027, SNFs participating in the SNF QRP program must participate in a validation program similar to that used for SNFs participating in the SNF VBP Program.

Medicare Annual Payment Rule — CMS is required to calculate an annual Medicare market-basket update to the payment rates. The SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule, issued on July 31, 2024 increased the Medicare payment rates to SNFs in fiscal year 2025 by 4.2%, which is based on a market basket of 3.0% plus a 1.7% market basket forecast error adjustment and a negative 0.5% productivity adjustment.

On July 29, 2022, CMS issued a final rule for fiscal year 2023 that increased the Medicare payment rates to aggregate net market basket by 2.7%. The increase results from the 5.1% update to the market basket, which is based on a 3.9% current year market basket increase plus a 1.5% market basket error adjustment, less a 0.3% productivity adjustment and a negative 2.3% adjustment as a result of the recalibrated parity adjustment. The recalibrated parity adjustment is being phased in at a rate of 2.3% per year on both the SNF PPS FY 2024 and FY 2023 Final Rules.

Sequestration of Medicare Rates —The Budget Control Act of 2011 requires a mandatory, across the board reduction in federal spending, called sequestration. Medicare FFS claims with dates of service or dates of discharge on or after April 1, 2013 incur a 2.0% reduction in Medicare payments through at least 2023, unless Congress takes further action. Under the CAA 2023, a further 4.0% cut to Medicare spending that would have been required under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (PAYGO) was waived for fiscal years 2023 and 2024. Instead, the CAA 2023 deferred any further Medicare sequestration under PAYGO until fiscal year 2025. The CAA 2023 also offset planned Medicare sequestrations that would have been as high as 4.0% and instead maintained fee schedule cuts of approximately 2.0%. Absent a further act by Congress, such as a consolidated appropriations act for 2025 or other bill addressing spending in fiscal year 2025 (including retroactively), the sequestration of Medicare FFS claims is expected to take effect in fiscal year 2025. On October 29, 2024, the Medicare Patient Access and Stabilization Act of 2024 (MPASA) was introduced in the House of Representatives, seeking to increase the amount paid to physicians under Medicare by 4.73%. MPASA was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and House Committee on Energy and Commerce on October 29, 2024, referred to the Subcommittee on Health on December 17, 2024 and no further action has been taken on this bill.

Table of Contents

Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing (SNF-VBP) Program — The SNF-VBP Program rewards SNFs with incentive payments based on the quality of care they provide to Medicare beneficiaries, as measured by a hospital readmissions measure. CMS annually adjusts its payment rules for SNFs using the SNF-VBP Program. CMS uses regulations to specify how it measures the performance for SNFs as well as the data that SNFs are to report to CMS. The deadlines for baseline period quality measure quarterly reporting and performance periods and standards began in the 2023 program year. The final rule for the fiscal year 2023 SNF PPS also provided for SNF-VBP program expansion beyond the use of its single, all-cause hospital readmission measure to determine payment, with the inclusion of measures in fiscal year 2026 for SNF healthcare associated infections requiring hospitalization (SNF HAI) and total nursing hours per resident day measures and in fiscal year 2027, the discharge to community post-acute care measure for SNFs, which assess the rate of successful discharges to the community from a SNF setting.

The PPR measure assesses the risk-standardized rate of unplanned and potentially avoidable readmissions during SNF stays for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. The new SNF WS PPR measure refines the original Skilled Nursing Facility 30-Day Potentially Preventable Readmission (SNFPPR) measure, which followed the requirements of the Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA) of 2014. The refinement in the SNF WS PPR measure shifts the observation window from a fixed 30-day post-hospital discharge to the duration of the SNF stay. Moreover, the time gap allowed between the prior inpatient discharge and the SNF admission has been extended from one day to 30 days. These changes, based on feedback from expert panels and a 2015 partnership, better align the measure with the IMPACT Act's provisions and enhance the reliability of tracking preventable readmissions. Additionally, the SNF WS PPR measure's calculations use two years of Medicare claims data to generate a provider-specific risk-standardized readmission rate.

The SNF PPS FY 2025 Final Rule adopted several operational and administrative updates to the SNF VBP Program. The SNF rule adopted a policy to select, retain and remove measurements to ensure the VBP Program’s evaluation metrics remain relevant and effective for assessing care quality, as well as policies for updating technical measures and policies for reviewing and correcting data CMS relies upon to calculate its measures. The rule allows CMS to update the case-mix methodology for the Total Nurse Staffing measure, and its policies to allow the review and revise measures, as well as review and correct data, allow SNFs to review and correct Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ) data from fiscal year 2026 and MDS data from fiscal year 2027, allowing CMS to fashion more accurate measures based on updated data.

Part B Rehabilitation Requirements — A portion of our revenue is paid by the Medicare Part B program under a fee schedule. Part B services are limited with a payment cap by combined speech-language pathology services (SLP), physical therapy (PT) services and a separate annual cap for occupational therapy (OT) services. On November 1, 2024, CMS issued the Calendar Year (CY) 2025 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) Final Rule (2025 PFS Final Rule).

For PT and SLP combined the threshold for coding modifier requirements was $2,330 for CY 2024 with the same threshold for OT services. The KX modifier is added to medical claims to indicate the providing clinician attests that the services corresponding to that claim were medically necessary and that the justification for those services is contained within the patient’s medical records. This modifier is intended for use where the services will exceed the threshold for those services set by the BBA and updated by annual fee schedule rules, yet are still appropriate and medically necessary, and thus should be compensated by Medicare.

Consistent with CMS’s “Patients over Paperwork” initiative, the agency has also been moving toward eliminating burdensome claims-based functional reporting requirements. Beginning in 2021, CMS rescinded 21 problematic National Correct Coding Initiative edits impacting outpatient therapy services, including services furnished under Medicare Part B primarily related to PT and OT services, removing a coding burden caused by requirements for additional documentation and claim modifier coding.

Table of Contents

Additionally, the Multiple Procedure Payment Reduction (MPPR) continues at a 50.0% reduction, which is applied to therapy procedures by reducing payments for practice expense of the second and subsequent procedures when services provided beyond one unit of one procedure are provided on the same day. The implementation of MPPR includes (1) facilities that provide Medicare Part B speech-language pathology, occupational therapy and physical therapy services and bill under the same provider number; and (2) providers in private practice, including speech-language pathologists, who perform and bill for multiple services in a single day.

The CAA 2023 extended certain, but not all, telehealth flexibilities until December 31, 2024, allowing certain telehealth flexibilities to continue after the PHE's expiration. The American Relief Act, 2025 extended some but not all telehealth flexibilities for an additional 3 months.

Under the 2025 PFS Final Rule, the 2.93% increase to the CY 2024 PFS Conversion Factor (CF) expired and CMS seeks to impose an estimated 0.05% adjustment based on changes in work relative value units (RVUs) for certain services. As a result, the 2025 PFS Final Rule implements a reimbursement reduction of 2.83%, with a CF of $32.35, which is a reduction from the CY 2024 CF of $33.29. The 2025 PFS Final Rule adopts a 3.6% increase to the threshold for coding modifier requirements for PT and SLP combined, totaling $2,410 for CY 2025 with the same threshold for OT services. The threshold for targeted medical review for PT and OT (combined) and SLP is expected to remain at $3,000 through CY 2027.

The 2025 PFS Final Rule also adopts a regulatory change that allows physical therapy assistants and occupational therapy assistants to be generally supervised by physical therapists and occupational therapists, respectively, in private practice, non-institutional settings, allowing greater flexibility in billing for those assistants’ services. Additionally, the 2025 PFS Final Rule excepts a therapist-established initial plan of care (POC) for PT, OT, or SLT services from requiring a physician or non-physician provider’s (NPP’s) signature, provided that (1) the patient’s physician or NPP referred the patient to the therapist and (2) the therapist has evidence that the POC was transmitted to the patient’s physician or NPP within 30 days of the patient’s initial evaluation. This flexibility applies only to the initial certification.

Finally, the 2025 PFS Final Rule reduces COVID-19 PHE-era telehealth flexibilities beginning on January 1, 2025. Under this final rule, certain restrictions on telehealth that existed prior to the COVID-19 PHE will go back into effect: most geographic and site-of-service restrictions to telehealth will return, while physicians can still provide telehealth from home, and can provide audio-only telehealth communication in specific circumstances where the patient is unable to use video technology. CMS is also establishing new coding and payment for caregiver training services, including training services provided through eligible telehealth means.

On October 29, 2024, MPASA was introduced in the House of Representatives, seeking to increase the amount paid to physicians under Medicare by 4.73%. MPASA was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and House Committee on Energy and Commerce on October 29, 2024, and no further action has been taken on this bill. On March 9, 2024, President Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, which included a 2.93% update to the CY 2024 PFS CF for dates of service March 9, 2024 through December 31, 2024. This replaced the 1.25% update provided by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023.

The 2024 PFS Final Rule was finalized in November 2023, which changed Medicare payments under the PFS and other Medicare Part B components. The billing period started on January 1, 2024 and ran through December 31, 2024.

The 2024 PFS Final Rule made payments when physicians and NPPs, involve caregivers in implementing an individualized plan of treatment or therapy. For PT and SLP combined, the threshold for coding modifier requirements increases to $2,330 for CY 2024 with the same threshold for OT services. The KX modifier is added to medical claims to indicate the providing clinician attests that the services corresponding to that claim were medically necessary and that the justification for those services is contained within the patient’s medical records.

Table of Contents

The 2024 PFS Final Rule allowed for general supervision of therapy assistants by PTs and OTs for remote therapeutic monitoring (RTM) services.

Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly

The requirements under the Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) provide greater operational flexibility and update information under the Medicare and Medicaid programs, including leniency in compliance with program requirements during and after a 3-year trial period and relieving restrictions placed on the team that assesses and provides for the needs of each PACE participant. Further, non-physician primary care providers can provide certain services in place of primary care physicians. The purpose of these RADV audits is to maintain the accuracy of risk-adjusted payments made to Medicare Advantage organizations.

In 2024, CMS issued a new prescription drug event (PDE) reporting requirements for PACE organizations to receive manufacturer discounts for drugs provided through Medicare Part D as provided for in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA). The additional PDE information must be submitted beginning January 1, 2025. In June of 2024, CMS also updated its statement of rights for PACE participants.

Decisions Regarding Skilled Nursing Facility Payment

Reimbursement rates and rules are subject to frequent change that historically, have had a significant effect on our revenue. The federal government and state governments continue to focus on efforts to curb spending on healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. We are not able to predict the outcome of the legislative process. We also cannot predict the extent to which proposals will be adopted or, if adopted and implemented, what effect, if any, such proposals and existing new legislation will have on us. Efforts to impose reduced allowances, greater discounts and more stringent cost controls by government and other payors are expected to continue and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

These include statutory and regulatory changes, rate adjustments (including retroactive adjustments), administrative or executive orders and government funding restrictions influenced by budgetary or political pressures, may materially adversely affect the rates at which Medicare reimburses us for our services. Implementation of these and other types of measures has in the past, and could in the future, result in substantial reductions in our revenue and operating margins. For a discussion of historic adjustments and recent changes to the Medicare program and other reimbursement rates, see Part I, Item 1A Risk Factors under the headings Risks Related to Our Business and Industry.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Various healthcare reform provisions became law upon enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The reforms contained in the ACA have affected our independent subsidiaries in some manner and are directed in large part at increased quality and cost reductions. Several of the reforms are very significant and could ultimately change the nature of our services, the methods of payment for our services and the underlying regulatory environment.

The IRA, which continued and expanded certain provisions of the ACA, extended the premium subsidies paid by the federal government, until the end of 2024, resulting in subsidies being available to offset or reduce the costs of private health insurance policies for qualifying individuals. This may aid older patients in obtaining or keeping their health insurance in order to pay for long-term care services. The CAA 2023 revised the funds available to fund Medicare in 2023 and deferred the PAYGO sequestration of Medicare expenses.

The changes in the presidential administration may significantly alter the current health care regulatory framework, payment activity, and impact our business and the health care industry, including any repeals, curtailments, extensions or expansions of certain ACA provisions, included, but not limited to recent rulemaking activity regarding ACA Section 1557's anti-discrimination provisions. We continually monitor these developments so we can respond to the changing regulatory environment impacting our business.

Table of Contents

Requirements of Participation

CMS has requirements that providers, including SNFs, must meet in order to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid Programs. Some of these requirements can be burdensome and costly. One such requirement of participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs involves limitations around the use of pre-dispute, binding arbitration agreements by SNFs. CMS has issued guidance and direction around arbitration that must be satisfied for any agreement to be enforceable and which may result in adverse consequences for our business if not followed.

Phase 2 and 3 of the Requirements of Participation focuses on: (1) resident abuse and neglect; (2) admission, transfer and discharge; (3) mental health and substance abuse disorders; (4) staffing sufficiency; (5) residents’ rights; (6) potential inaccurate diagnoses or assessments; (7) prescription and use of pharmaceuticals; (8) infection prevention and control; (9) arbitration of disputes between facilities and residents; (10) psychosocial outcomes and related severity; and (11) the timeliness and completion of state investigations.

CMS "grandfathered" certain facilities and will allow SNFs that were participating in Medicare before July 5, 2016 and that previously used the Fire Safety Evaluation System (FSES) to continue using the 2001 FSES mandatory values when determining compliance with applicable standards. CMS also updated the Requirements of Participation to revise existing qualification requirements for directors of food and nutrition services in SNFs, while "grandfathering" in directors with two or more years of experience and certain minimum training in food safety so they may continue in that role without satisfying further educational requirements.

These updates provided more information for state surveyors to utilize when evaluating SNFs’ compliance with the Medicare Requirements of Participation, as well as included guidance for facilities on operationalizing compliance with these requirements based on how surveyors would measure and evaluate facility performance.

Civil and Criminal Fraud and Abuse Laws and Enforcement

Various complex federal and state laws exist which govern a wide array of referrals, relationships and arrangements, and prohibit fraud by healthcare providers. Governmental agencies are devoting increasing attention and resources to such anti-fraud efforts. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 expanded the penalties for healthcare fraud. Additionally, the government or those acting on its behalf may bring an action under the FCA, alleging that a healthcare provider has defrauded the government by submitting a claim for items or services not rendered as claimed, which may include coding errors, billing for services not provided and submitting false or erroneous cost reports. The FCA clarifies that if an item or service is provided in violation of the AKS, the claim submitted for those items or services is a false claim that may be prosecuted under the FCA as a false claim. Under the qui tam or “whistleblower” provisions of the FCA, a private individual with knowledge of fraud may bring a claim on behalf of the federal government and receive a percentage of the federal government’s recovery. The Biden-Harris Administration had also signaled an increasing focus on nursing home performance and the reimbursement nursing homes receive from federal healthcare payment programs. The change in the presidency following the 2024 presidential elections may result in a change to this focus, in whole or in part. There has not yet been public disclosure of the priorities of the new Presidential Administration, in addition to those of the anticipated new leaders of HHS and CMS, as they relate to SNFs and long-term care facilities. Many states also have a false claim prohibition that mirrors or closely tracks the federal FCA.

CMS can recover overpayments from health care providers up to six years following the year in which payment was made.

Table of Contents

In 2021, the OIG released the result of an audit finding that Medicare overpaid millions of dollars for chronic care management (CCM) services. The OIG's 2021 report found that in calendar years 2017 and 2018, Medicare overpaid millions of dollars in CCM claims. In 2022, the OIG released an audit revealing that CMS had not collected $226 million, or 45%, of identified overpayments within that period, potentially affecting SNFs. These investigatory actions by OIG demonstrate its increased scrutiny into post-hospital SNF care provided to beneficiaries and may encourage additional oversight or stricter compliance standards. In 2023, representatives of the DOJ speaking at certain industry events, including the American Health Law Association’s Fraud and Compliance Forum, have indicated that its healthcare enforcement trends would emphasize opioid prescribing, Medicare Advantage and managed care plan fraud, and COVID-19 related fraud, including under various relief programs available during and in conjunction with the pandemic. In November of 2023, OIG added to its work plan an audit of nursing homes' nurse staffing hours reported in CMS's payroll-based journal, for which OIG expects to issue a report in FY 2025. In addition, the OIG identified the following areas as its "key goals" for oversight: (1) protecting residents from fraud, abuse, neglect, and promoting quality of care; (2) promoting emergency preparedness and emergency response efforts: (3) strengthening frontline oversight; and (4) supporting federal monitoring of nursing homes to mitigate risks to residents.

In February of 2024, the OIG added to its work plan a study regarding the use of the National Background Check Program (NBCP) in conducting background checks of prospective long-term care provider employees. The purpose of this study will be to prepare a report regarding the cost of background checks, number of applicants who received background checks, and disqualification of employees during and after NBCP participation. This report will also include information regarding the cost of background checks and any unintended consequences experienced as a result of using this program. In April of 2024, the OIG updated its work plan to study and determine whether and how states used Medicaid supplemental payments for use in satisfying the state’s obligations to pay nursing facilities any amounts due under the state’s nursing facility upper payment limit. The OIG further updated its work plan in June 2024 to study and assess the implementation of the Special Focus Facility Program for nursing facilities based on facilities that participated in the program from 2013 through 2022.

Our business model, is based in part on serving higher acuity patients. Over time our overall patient mix has consistently shifted to higher acuity in most facilities we operate. We also use specialized care-delivery software that assists our caregivers in more accurately capturing and recording services in order to, among other things, increase reimbursement to levels appropriate for the care actually delivered. These efforts may place us under greater scrutiny with the OIG, CMS, our fiscal intermediaries, recovery audit contractors and others.

Federal Healthcare Reform

Five-Star Quality Reporting Metrics — The Quality Payment Program (QPP) was created under the Medicare Access and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2015. This program was based on the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) or the use of Alternative Payment Models (APM), which relied on quality data CMS gathered and evaluated using the Five-Star Quality Rating system, which includes a rating of one to five in various categories. These categories include (but are not limited to) the results of surveys conducted by state inspectors, other health inspection outcomes, staffing, spending, readmissions and stay durations; the data collected and its weighting in determining a rating on a scale of one to five stars is subject to periodic and ongoing revision, re-balancing and adjustment by CMS to reflect market conditions and CMS’s priorities in patient care. Since 2020, CMS’s measurement of the data reported by providers, including SNFs, has become more competitive and resulted in a reduction of four- and five-star rankings available under CMS’s Five-Star Quality Rating system.

The Five-Star Quality reporting system for nursing homes is displayed on CMS's consumer-based Nursing Home Compare website, along with a consumer alert icon next to nursing homes that have been cited for incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation on the Nursing Home Compare website. The Nursing Home Compare website is updated monthly with CMS’s refresh of survey inspection results on that website. In addition, the Five Star Quality Ratings incorporated staffing data such as staff tenure and SNF weekend staffing beginning with the October 2022 refresh of the Nursing Home Compare website.

Table of Contents

In July of 2024, CMS updated the Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Rating System’s Technical Users’ Guide to identify and explain a change in staffing case-mix methodology to adopt a model based on PDPM, changing the measures that CMS previously froze in April of 2024. This update to the Technical Users’ Guide also extended the gap period (during which no work hours are reported) for defining nurse staffing turnover from 60 days to 90 days. As a result of this update, for the three staffing turnover measures, individuals who no longer work in the nursing home are defined as eligible individuals who have a period of at least 90 consecutive days in which they do not work at all, increased from 60 days. CMS also updated the risk-adjustment models for the four claims-based measures to reflect measures of functional abilities and goals, rather than residents’ functional status. Finally, CMS revised the thresholds for the staffing measures and claims-based quality measures to maintain the same distribution by points for affected staffing and quality measures, maintaining the same proportions of available five- and four-star ratings for facilities.

In April of 2024, CMS updated its Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Rating System’s Technical Users’ Guide in several respects. First, CMS froze four of the quality measures from any changes: (1) percentage of residents who made improvements in function (short stay); (2) percentage of residents whose need for help with activities of daily living has increased (long stay); (3) percentage of residents whose ability to move independently worsened (long stay); and (4) percentage of high-risk residents with pressure ulcers (long stay). All of these measures will be frozen until January 2025, while the short-stay functional improvement measure is replaced in October of 2024 with a new cross-setting function measure used in the SNF QRP. CMS also updated the staffing level case-mix adjustment methodology and froze three staffing level measures until July of 2024: (1) adjusted RN staffing (HPRD); (2) adjusted total nurse staffing (HPRD); and (3) adjusted total nurse staffing on weekends (HPRD). These frozen measures will not affect staff turnover measures. Additionally, beginning in April of 2024, CMS revised the staffing rating methodology to give the lowest possible score for staffing turnover measures to providers who fail to submit staffing data or submit erroneous data.

Under these guidelines, only 10% of nursing facilities can receive a five-star rating in the state where it operates, with the bottom 20% receiving a one-star rating and the remaining 70% receiving a distribution of two-, three-, and four-star ratings.

State Legislation Concerning Nursing Home Supervision — California passed into law a bill which changes the limitations, or “caps,” on non-economic damages that can be awarded in medical negligence cases filed against healthcare providers (including skilled nursing and long-term care facilities). Beginning on January 1, 2023, non-economic damages (i.e., pain and suffering) available to plaintiffs suing healthcare providers in medical malpractice and professional negligence cases increased from $0.25 million to $0.35 million, and will then increase over the following ten years up to a $0.75 million cap. Once the limit reaches $0.75 million, a 2% annual inflationary adjustment will attach beginning on January 1, 2034. In wrongful death cases that arise from claims of medical malpractice and professional negligence, the cap on non-economic damages increased from $0.25 million to $0.50 million on January 1, 2023, and increase every year thereafter for ten years until the cap on non-economic damages in such cases is $1.0 million; thereafter, this cap will also be subject to an annual 2.0% increase. The caps are separate as to each claim, meaning that there is one cap for negligence and one cap for wrongful death. The new limits on non-economic damages apply prospectively to lawsuits filed on and after January 1, 2023.

In 2022, California’s Governor signed into law the Skilled Nursing Facility Ownership and Management Reform Act of 2022. This law increases the oversight authority of the California Department of Public Health, and changes several provisions regarding SNF licensing in the State of California. This includes eliminating previous regulatory provisions that permitted SNFs to operate in advance of receiving their formal license from the State. This law also requires SNF license applicants to disclose additional information in connection with a license application and evaluates more data regarding the applicant’s prior operations, including prior citations, CMS sanctions and legal proceedings against the applicant or other facilities owned or managed by the applicant before issuing a license.

United States Supreme Court Decisions – On June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, deciding to vacate and remand decisions by the United States Courts of Appeals that relied on the Supreme Court’s own 1984 precedent in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which sometimes required courts to defer to “permissible” agency interpretations of the statutes those agencies administered and enforced—a legal doctrine known as the “Chevron doctrine.” In Loper, the Supreme Court had to decide whether it should overrule or clarify the Chevron doctrine based on its application more than 40 years after its creation, and the Supreme Court chose to overrule it.

Table of Contents

The Chevron doctrine required courts to use a two-step process to interpret statutes administered by federal agencies. After determining that the Chevron doctrine may apply to a dispute before it, a federal court must assess whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue. If (and only if) the congressional intent of the statute is clear, that is the end of the inquiry as to the statute’s meaning. If the court determines that the statute is silent or ambiguous regarding the issue at hand, then the Chevron doctrine requires the court to defer to the agency’s interpretation if it “is based on a permissible construction of the statute.”

The Supreme Court’s Loper decision found that the Chevron doctrine is incompatible with the federal Administrative Procedure Act’s requirement for courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether a federal agency has acted within its statutory authority. It further held that courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of a statute merely because the statute is ambiguous, as it is the responsibility of the court, rather than an agency that administers or acts under a statute, to discern the statute’s meaning. The Supreme Court reasoned that allowing agencies to interpret the laws they enforce or act under, rather than reserving that activity for the courts, was an impermissible delegation of an activity reserved to the courts.

While the decisions at issue in Loper pertained to fishing regulations promulgated by the Department of Commerce, the Chevron doctrine’s significance to the highly regulated field of healthcare is profound. The Chevron doctrine is frequently implicated in litigation over healthcare regulation, ranging from rules concerning staffing requirements and the validity of arbitration provisions, to requirements for healthcare workers to be vaccinated. Subsequent analysis has focused on the limits of the Loper decision, including any deference that courts may still afford to administrative agencies when based on agency fact-finding and policy-making, particularly where such power is expressly delegated to the agency by statute. The Loper decision likely will have significant and lasting consequences for the promulgation and enforcement of federal regulations by HHS and CMS, and may bear on the depth and detail of future legislation that is passed and enacted as statutes by Congress so that such laws can be enforced without administrative rulemaking or agency enforcement mechanisms.

Monitoring Compliance in Our Independent Subsidiaries

Governmental agencies and other authorities periodically inspect our independent subsidiaries to assess compliance with various standards, rules and regulations, with potential fines, sanctions and other penalties for noncompliance. Unannounced surveys or inspections generally occur at least annually and may also follow a government agency's receipt of a complaint about a facility. Facilities must pass these inspections to maintain licensure under state law, to obtain or maintain certification under the Medicare and Medicaid programs, to continue participation in the Veterans Administration program at some facilities, and to comply with provider contracts with managed care clients at many facilities. From time to time, our independent subsidiaries, like others in the healthcare industry, may receive notices from federal and state regulatory agencies of an alleged failure to substantially comply with applicable standards, rules or regulations. These notices may require corrective action, may impose civil monetary penalties for noncompliance, and may threaten or impose other operating restrictions on SNFs such as admission holds, provisional skilled nursing license, or increased staffing requirements. If our independent subsidiaries fail to comply with these directives or otherwise fail to comply substantially with licensure and certification laws, rules and regulations, the facility could lose its certification as a Medicare or Medicaid provider, or lose its license permitting operation in the State.

Facilities with deficiencies that immediately jeopardize patient health and safety and those that are classified as poor performing facilities, however, may not be given an opportunity to correct their deficiencies prior to the imposition of remedies and other enforcement actions. Moreover, facilities with poor regulatory histories continue to be classified by CMS as poor performing facilities notwithstanding any intervening change in ownership, unless the new owner obtains a new Medicare provider agreement instead of assuming the facility's existing agreement. However, new owners nearly always assume the existing Medicare provider agreement due to the difficulty and time delays generally associated with obtaining new Medicare certifications, especially in previously certified locations with sub-par operating histories. Accordingly, facilities that have poor regulatory histories before acquisition by our independent subsidiaries and that develop new deficiencies after acquisition are more likely to have sanctions imposed upon them by CMS or state regulators.

SFFs receive heightened scrutiny and more frequent regulatory surveys. Failure to improve the quality of care can result in fines and termination from participation in Medicare and Medicaid.

Table of Contents

In October 2022, CMS increased penalties for SFFs that fail to improve their performance upon further inspection by CMS, increasing the standards SFFs must meet to graduate from the SFF program, maintaining heightened oversight of any SFF for a period of three years after it graduates and increasing the technical assistance CMS provides to SFFs.

Sanctions such as denial of payment for new admissions often are scheduled to go into effect before surveyors return to verify compliance. Generally, if the surveyors confirm that the facility is in compliance upon their re-evaluation, the sanctions never take effect. However, if they determine that the facility is not in compliance, the denial of payment goes into effect retroactive to the date given in the original notice, leaving operators with the task of deciding whether to continue accepting patients after the potential denial of payment date--risking the retroactive denial of revenue. Some of our independent subsidiaries have been or will be in denial of payment status due to findings of continued regulatory deficiencies, resulting in an actual loss of revenue associated with patients admitted after the denial of payment date. Additional sanctions could ensue and, if imposed, could include various remedies up to and including decertification.

CMS has undertaken several initiatives to increase or intensify Medicaid and Medicare survey and enforcement activities, including federal oversight of state surveyors. CMS is taking steps to focus more survey and enforcement efforts on facilities with findings of substandard care or repeat violations of Medicaid and Medicare standards and to identify multi-facility providers with patterns of noncompliance. CMS is also increasing its oversight of state survey agencies and requiring state agencies to use enforcement sanctions and remedies more promptly when substandard care or repeat violations are identified, to investigate complaints more promptly, and to survey facilities more consistently.

Regulations Regarding Financial Arrangements

We are also subject to federal and state laws that regulate financial arrangement by and between healthcare providers, such as the federal and state anti-kickback laws, the Stark laws, and various state anti-referral laws.

The OIG has issued regulations that create “safe harbors” for certain conduct and business relationships that are deemed protected under the Social Security Act. In order to receive safe harbor protection, all of the requirements of a safe harbor must be met. The fact that a given business arrangement does not fall within one of these safe harbors does not render the arrangement per se illegal. Business arrangements of healthcare service providers that fail to satisfy the applicable safe harbor criteria, if investigated, will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based upon all facts and circumstances and risk increased scrutiny and possible sanctions by enforcement authorities.

Violations of the Social Security Act can result in inflation-adjusted criminal penalties of more than $0.1 million and ten years imprisonment. It can also result in inflation-adjusted civil monetary penalties of more than $0.1 million per violation and an assessment of up to three times the total amount of remuneration offered, paid, solicited, or received. It may also result in an individual's or organization's exclusion from future participation in federal healthcare programs. State Medicaid programs are required to enact an anti-kickback statute. Many states in which our independent subsidiaries operate have adopted or are considering similar legislative proposals, some of which extend beyond that state's Medicaid program, to prohibit the payment or receipt of remuneration for the referral of patients regardless of the source of payment for the care.

Additionally, the "Stark Law" of the Social Security Act provides that a physician may not refer a Medicare or Medicaid patient for a “designated health service” to an entity with which the physician or an immediate family member has a financial relationship unless the financial arrangement meets an exception under the Stark Law or its regulations. Designated health services include, in relevant part, inpatient and outpatient hospital services, PT, OT, SLP, durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies, diagnostic imaging, and home health services. Under the Stark Law, a “financial relationship” is defined as an ownership or investment interest or a compensation arrangement. If such a financial relationship exists and does not meet a Stark Law exception, the entity is disallowed from seeking payment under the Medicare or Medicaid programs or from collecting from the patient or other payor. Statutory and regulatory exceptions and exemptions to this exist and have specific rules that must be followed to qualify for such exception or exemption. Any funds collected for an item or service resulting from a referral that violates the Stark Law are not eligible for payment by federal healthcare programs and must be repaid. Violations of the Stark Law may result in the imposition of civil monetary penalties, including, treble damages. Individuals and organizations may also be excluded from participation in federal healthcare programs for Stark Law violations. Many states have enacted healthcare provider referral laws that go beyond physician self-referrals or apply to a greater range of services than just the designated health services under the Stark Law.

Table of Contents

Regulations Regarding Patient Record Confidentiality

Health care providers are also subject to laws and regulations enacted to protect the confidentiality of patient health information and patients' right to access such information. For example, HHS has issued rules pursuant to HIPAA, including the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act which governs our use and disclosure of protected health information of patients. We and our independent subsidiaries have established policies and procedures to comply with HIPAA privacy and security requirements and our independent subsidiaries have adopted and implemented HIPAA compliance plans, which we believe comply with the HIPAA privacy and security regulations, which impose significant costs for ongoing compliance activities.

There are numerous other laws and legislative and regulatory initiatives at the federal and state levels addressing privacy and security concerns. Our independent subsidiaries are also subject to any federal or state privacy-related laws that are more restrictive than the privacy regulations issued under HIPAA.

On January 17, 2024, CMS published the CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization Final Rule (Interoperability Final Rule), which affects the data standards and application programming interfaces (APIs) used by entities that are payors for our services, including but not limited to Medicare Advantage organizations, Medicaid fee-for-service providers, and managed care organizations. This new rule requires these payor entities to adopt new patient access APIs beginning January 1, 2026, and to complete implementation of both patient and provider access APIs by January 1, 2027, to facilitate the sharing of payor information with payors and providers. While the purpose of this final rule is predominantly oriented to sharing information in the clinical setting and expediting the exchange of prior authorization data, this new rule may have implications for our business and how information is shared among our independent subsidiaries that participate in these programs, the payors, residents, and residents’ families involved in their care.

Antitrust Laws

We are also subject to federal and state antitrust laws. Enforcement of the antitrust laws against healthcare providers is common, and antitrust liability may arise in a wide variety of circumstances, including third party contracting, physician relations, joint venture, merger, affiliation and acquisition activities. On February 3, 2023, the DOJ’s Antitrust Division withdrew its support for three policies that had been jointly created by the DOJ and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 1993, 1996, and 2011, announcing instead, without providing further alternative guidance, that the DOJ would take a case-by-case enforcement approach to evaluate conduct in the healthcare industry, citing that the previous policies were outdated and overly permissive. Similarly, on July 14, 2023, the FTC withdrew two antitrust policy statements related to enforcement in healthcare markets. Moving forward, the FTC will evaluate mergers and conduct in healthcare markets on a case-by-case basis using principles of antitrust enforcement and competition policy.

On July 19, 2023, the DOJ and FTC released a draft joint statement of antitrust policy that outlines 13 guidelines to be used when determining if a merger is unlawfully anticompetitive under antitrust laws. These guidelines cover various aspects of antitrust enforcement relevant to SNF and senior living facilities, such as market concentration, competition between firms, risk of coordination, elimination of potential entrants, control of products or services, vertical mergers, dominant positions, trends toward concentration, series of multiple acquisitions, multi-sided platforms, competing buyers, partial ownership or minority interests and overall impact on competition. The draft joint statement also includes detailed sections on the application of the guidelines, defining relevant markets and approaches to rebuttal evidence. These proposed statements are not exhaustive and the DOJ and FTC may focus on one or multiple guidelines depending on the specific circumstances of each merger. These proposed general statements of antitrust policy, once finalized, may be a prelude to a new joint statement of healthcare antitrust policy of the DOJ and FTC, with the agencies’ finalized general statements providing insight into whether healthcare-specific statements will be issued. This development and potential new guidance regarding DOJ and FTC antitrust policy increases risk and uncertainty regarding transactions that may be subject to criminal and civil enforcement by federal and state agencies, as well as by private litigants.

Further change is expected with respect to the DOJ and FTC’s antitrust policies due to the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, including as to how they relate to healthcare. As a result, these changes to the DOJ and FTC’s antitrust policies may be changed materially, not implemented, or reverted to prior statements that were withdrawn in February of 2023.

Table of Contents

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Our independent subsidiaries must also comply with the ADA, and similar state and local laws to the extent that the facilities are "public accommodations" as defined in those laws. The obligation to comply with the ADA and other similar laws is an ongoing obligation, and the independent subsidiaries continue to assess their facilities relative to ADA compliance and make appropriate modifications as needed.

Civil Rights

On January 25, 2024, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for HHS issued guidance to hospitals and long-term care facilities, emphasizing their obligation under CMS regulations to ensure non-discriminatory visitation policies, especially during public health emergencies. This guidance, part of the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism, clarifies that these facilities cannot discriminate based on religion or other classes or characteristics protected against discrimination under federal civil rights laws. The guidance includes examples where non-compliance occurred, such as unequal treatment based on religious affiliation or dietary restrictions, and stricter screening processes for certain religious groups. OCR offers assistance to facilities to obtain compliance with these standards and encourages residents and other affected individuals to file complaints with OCR for potential administrative or civil action in cases of civil rights violations. OCR has been increasingly involved in the monitoring and enforcement of patient and resident rights, particularly under ongoing rulemaking under Section 1557 of the ACA.

Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) Qualification

We elected for Standard Bearer to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Standard Bearer's qualification as a REIT will depend upon its ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various complex requirements under the Internal Revenue Code, relating to, among other things, the sources of its gross income, the composition and value of its assets, distribution levels to its shareholders and the concentration of ownership of its capital stock. We believe that Standard Bearer is organized in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT under the Code and that its manner of operation has and will enable it to continue to meet the requirements for qualification and taxation as a REIT.

REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES AND ANCILLARY SERVICES

As previously mentioned, senior living services revenue, which accounted for 2.1% of total revenue, is primarily derived from private pay residents and senior living revenue derived from Medicaid funds. Thus, some of the regulations discussed above applicable to Medicaid providers, also apply to senior living.

A majority of states provide, or are approved to provide, Medicaid payments for personal care and medical services to some residents in licensed senior living communities. As rates paid to senior living community operators are generally lower than rates paid to SNF operators, some states use Medicaid funding of senior living services as a means of lowering the cost of services for residents who may not need the higher level of health services provided in SNFs. States that administer Medicaid programs for services in senior living communities are responsible for monitoring the participating communities and, as a result of the growth of senior living in recent years, these states have adopted licensing standards applicable to senior living communities.

CMS has continued to commence a series of actions to increase its oversight of state quality assurance programs for senior living communities and has provided guidance and technical assistance to states to improve their ability to monitor and improve the quality of services paid through Medicaid waiver programs. CMS is encouraging state Medicaid programs to expand their use of home and community-based services as alternatives to facility-based services, pursuant to provisions of the ACA, and other authorities, through the use of several programs.

The types of laws and statutes affecting the regulatory landscape of the post-acute industry continue to expand and the pressure to enforce those laws by federal and state authorities continues to grow as well. In order to operate our businesses, we and our independent subsidiaries must comply with federal, state and local laws from healthcare including provisions regarding patient safety, staffing, and prescription drugs to environmental issues. Changes in the law or new interpretations of existing laws may have an adverse impact on our methods and costs of doing business.

Table of Contents

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

We strive to reduce our environmental impact through initiatives to modernize our facilities, conserve water, optimize waste, work towards a paperless office and partner with green vendors. Our ongoing and planned facility modernization initiatives include solar projects, heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC) upgrades, water systems updates, lighting retrofits and utility upgrades. Additionally, we track and evaluate the utilities used by our facilities to drive our initiatives. For the year ended December 31, 2024, we spent $158.2 million on purchases of property improvements and equipment which included facility modernization initiatives.

Risk Management and Strategy

We identify and assess environmental risk to the organization by:

•Conducting assessments of transition risks, which are risks related to the transition to a lower-carbon economy, and physical risks, which are risks related to the physical impacts of climate change.

•Identifying climate-related opportunities, which includes programs to reduce electricity usage and carbon emissions at our independent subsidiaries.

•Identifying the potential financial impact of transition risks, physical risks and climate-related opportunities.

•Developing and implementing our strategy, which focuses on monitoring environmental policy and on-going developments, ensuring community resiliency, evaluating usage of energy management systems, building operational and emergency response systems, performing hazard vulnerability assessments and tracking and responding to developing natural disasters.

Governance

Ensign's environmental management team (EMT) is part of our ESG Committee. The EMT is led by the Service Center's leadership team members including Construction and Asset Development as well as its Executive Management. The EMT is responsible for:

•Implementation and continuous execution of our environment management system and policy.

•Development of the Company's environmental management policy.

•Identification of climate related risks under the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures framework.

•Providing structure and support to our independent subsidiaries that are led by local operators to make decisions on their capital expenditure projects at their facilities. The team advises our local field operators on best practices and identifies opportunities for them to assess priorities of projects.

•Overseeing environmental programs which include the evaluation and installation of LED lighting, solar panel, improved doors and insulation, automated HVAC controls and thermal efficiency projects related to micro-turbine, and demand control ventilation to name a few.

•Development of targets for reduction of carbon emissions, and increase ENERGY STAR scores.

•Tracking and monitoring of currently available environmental metrics such as utility usage and development of an energy management system that tracks greenhouse gas emissions and more.

•Preparing for applicable environmental audits in the future.

Our business is subject to a variety of federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. As a healthcare provider, we face regulatory requirements in areas of air and water quality control, medical and low-level radioactive waste management and disposal, asbestos management, response to mold and lead-based paint in our facilities and employee safety.

Table of Contents

As an owner or operator of our facilities, we also may be required to investigate and remediate hazardous substances that are located on and/or under the property, including any such substances that may have migrated off, or may have been discharged or transported from the property. Part of our operations involves the handling, use, storage, transportation, disposal and discharge of medical, biological, infectious, toxic, flammable and other hazardous materials, wastes, pollutants or contaminants. In addition, we are sometimes unable to determine with certainty whether prior uses of our facilities and properties or surrounding properties may have produced continuing environmental contamination or noncompliance, particularly where the timing or cost of making such determinations is not deemed cost-effective. These activities, as well as the possible presence of such materials in, on and under our properties, may result in damage to individuals, property or the environment; may interrupt operations or increase costs; may result in legal liability, damages, injunctions or fines; may result in investigations, administrative proceedings, penalties or other governmental agency actions; and may not be covered by insurance.

We believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental and occupational health and safety requirements. However, we cannot assure you that we will not encounter liabilities with respect to these regulations in the future, and such liabilities may result in material adverse consequences to our operations or financial condition.

For additional information on the EMT and our environmental sustainability efforts, please see our ESG report, which is available on our website at www.ensigngroup.net.

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

We are subject to the reporting requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Consequently, we are required to file reports and information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including reports on the following forms: annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. These reports, proxy and information statements and other information concerning our company may be accessed through the SEC's website at http://www.sec.gov.

You may also find on our website at www.ensigngroup.net, electronic copies of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Such filings are placed on our website as soon as reasonably possible after they are filed with the SEC. All such filings are available free of charge. The information contained in, or that can be accessed through, our website does not constitute a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

Item 1A. RISK FACTORS

We are providing the following summary of the risk factors contained in our Form 10-K to enhance the readability and accessibility of our risk factor disclosures. We encourage our stockholders to carefully review the risk factors contained in this Form 10-K in their entirety for additional information regarding the risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to vary materially from recent results or from our anticipated future results.

Risks Related to our Business and Industry

•The rules of Medicare and Medicaid, including reductions of reimbursement rates, changes to spending requirements, data reporting, measurement and evaluation standards could have a material, adverse effect on our revenues, financial condition and results of operations.

•State-level direct spending requirements could negatively impact our results of operations.

•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.

•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.

•We are subject to various government reviews, audits and investigations that could adversely affect our business, including an obligation to refund amounts previously paid to us, potential criminal charges, loss of licensure, the imposition of fines and sanctions.

•We are subject to extensive and complex laws and government regulations. If we are not operating in compliance with these laws and regulations or if these laws and regulations change, we could be required to make significant expenditures or change our operations in order to bring our facilities and operations into compliance.

•Public and government calls for increased enforcement efforts toward SNFs, past and potential rulemaking that results in enhanced enforcement and penalties, and new guidance for surveyors regarding the review of SNFs and enforcement of their Requirements of Participation, could result in increased scrutiny by state and federal survey agencies, including sanctions that could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

•CMS’s changes to the SFF program and its look-back period may create greater risk of our facilities being subject to this program and subject to potential fines and sanctions, even after graduating from the SFF program.

•Federal minimum staffing mandates may adversely affect our labor costs, ability to maintain desired levels of patient or resident capacity, and profitability.

•Future cost containment initiatives undertaken by payors may limit our revenue and profitability.

•

•We may be subject to increased investigation and enforcement activities related to HIPAA violations.

•Security breaches and other cyber-security incidents could violate security laws and subject us to significant liability.

•If our independent subsidiaries are not fully reimbursed for all services for which each facility bills through consolidated billing, our revenue, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

•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.

•Annual caps, uncertainty regarding reimbursement and other cost-reductions for outpatient therapy services may reduce our future revenue and profitability or cause us to incur losses.

•Increased scrutiny of our activities and billing practices by the OIG or other regulatory authorities may result in an increase in regulatory monitoring and oversight, decreased reimbursement rates, or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•State efforts to regulate or deregulate the healthcare services industry or the construction or expansion of healthcare facilities could impair our ability to expand our operations, or could result in increased competition.

•Newly enacted legislation in the States where our independent subsidiaries are located may impact the volume and exposure in claims filed and the overall cost of those cases from a defense and indemnity standpoint.

•Changes to federal and state employment-related laws and regulations could increase our cost of doing business.

•Required regulatory approvals could delay or prohibit transfers of our healthcare operations, which could result in periods in which we are unable to receive reimbursement for such properties.

•Compliance with federal and state fair housing, fire, safety, staffing, and other regulations may require us to incur unexpected expenses, which could be costly to us.

•Our revenue, financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted by any changes in the acuity mix of patients in our independent subsidiaries as well as payor mix and payment methodologies.

•We are subject to litigation that could result in significant legal costs and large settlement amounts or damage awards. Similarly, a change in the enforceability of arbitration provisions between SNFs and senior living facilities and residents and patients may affect the risks we face from claims and potential litigation.

Table of Contents

•If our regular internal investigations into the care delivery, recordkeeping and billing processes of our independent subsidiaries detect instances of noncompliance, efforts to correct such non-compliance could materially decrease our revenue.

•We may be unable to complete future facility or business acquisitions at attractive prices or at all, or may elect to dispose of underperforming or non-strategic independent subsidiaries, either of which could decrease our revenue.

•We may not be able to successfully integrate acquired facilities and businesses into our operations, or we may be exposed to costs, liabilities and regulatory issues that may adversely affect our operations.

•In undertaking acquisitions, we may be adversely impacted by costs, liabilities and regulatory issues that may adversely affect our operations.

•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.

•If we are unable to obtain insurance, or if insurance becomes more costly for us to obtain, our business may be adversely affected, and our self-insurance programs may expose us to significant and unexpected costs and losses.

•The geographic concentration of our independent subsidiaries could leave us vulnerable to economic downturn, regulatory changes or acts of nature in those areas.

•

•The risks associated with leased property where our independent subsidiaries operate could adversely affect our business, financial position or results of operations.

•Failure to generate sufficient cash flow to cover required payments or meet operating covenants under our long-term debt, mortgages and long-term operating leases could result in defaults under such agreements and cross-defaults under other debt, mortgage or operating lease arrangements, which could harm our independent subsidiaries and cause us to lose facilities or experience foreclosures.

•A continued housing slowdown or housing downturn could decrease demand for senior living services.

•As we continue to acquire and lease real estate assets, we may not be successful in identifying and consummating these transactions.

•As we expand our presence in other relevant healthcare industries, we would become subject to risks in a market in which we have limited experience.

•If our referral sources fail to view us as an attractive skilled nursing provider, or if our referral sources otherwise refer fewer patients, our patient base may decrease.

•We may need additional capital to fund our independent subsidiaries and finance our growth, and we may not be able to obtain it on terms acceptable to us, or at all, which may limit our ability to grow.

•The condition of the financial markets could limit the availability of debt and equity financing sources to fund the capital and liquidity requirements of our business.

•Delays in reimbursement may cause liquidity problems.

•The utilization and expansion of managed care organizations may contribute to delays or reductions in our reimbursement, including Managed Medicaid.

•Compliance with the regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development may require us to make unanticipated expenditures which could increase our costs.

•Failure to safeguard our patient trust funds may subject us to citations, fines and penalties.

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

•Certain directors who serve on our Board of Directors also serve as directors of Pennant, and ownership of shares of Pennant common stock by our directors and executive officers may create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest.

•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.

•Failure to comply with existing environmental laws could result in increased expenditures, litigation and potential loss to our business and in our asset value.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock

•We may not be able to pay or maintain dividends and the failure to do so would adversely affect our stock price.

•Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law contain provisions that could discourage transactions resulting in a change in control, which may negatively affect the market price of our common stock.

Table of Contents

You should carefully consider each of the following risk factors. The risk factors generally have been separated into two categories: risks relating to our business and our industry and risks relating to our common stock. Based on the information currently known to us, we believe that the following information identifies the most significant risk factors affecting our company in each of these categories of risks. However, the risks and uncertainties we face are not limited to those set forth in the risk factors described below. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business. In addition, past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of future performance and historical trends should not be used to anticipate results or trends in future periods.

In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline. You should carefully read the following risk factors, together with the financial statements, related notes and other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that contain risks and uncertainties. Please refer to the section entitled "Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" on page [1] of this Annual Report on Form 10-K in connection with your consideration of the risk factors and other important factors that may affect future results described below.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

The rules of Medicare and Medicaid, including reductions of reimbursement rates, changes to spending requirements, data reporting, measurement and evaluation standards could have a material, adverse effect on our revenues, financial condition and results of operations.

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.

The Medicare program and its reimbursement rates and rules are subject to frequent change, including statutory and regulatory changes, rate adjustments (including retroactive adjustments), annual caps that limit the amount that can be paid (including deductible and coinsurance amounts), administrative or executive orders and government funding restrictions, all of which may materially adversely affect the rates at which Medicare reimburses us for our services. See Item 1., under Government Regulation, Sequestration of Medicare Rates, for further information. Implementation of these and other types of measures has in the past and could in the future result in substantial reductions in our revenue and operating margins.

Additionally, payments can be delayed or declined due to determinations that certain costs are not reimbursable or reasonable because either adequate or additional documentation was not provided or because certain services were not covered or considered medically necessary. Additionally, revenue from these payors can be retroactively adjusted after a new examination during the claims settlement process or as a result of post-payment audits. New legislation and regulatory proposals could impose further limitations on government payments to healthcare providers.

CMS often changes the rules governing the Medicare program, including those governing reimbursement. Changes to the Medicare program that could adversely affect our business could include, but are not limited to the following:

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

•limits on the services or types of providers for which Medicare will provide reimbursement;

•changes in methodology for patient assessment and/or determination of payment levels;

•changes in staff requirements as a condition of payment or eligibility for Medicare reimbursement (See also, Item 1., under Government Regulation);

•the reduction or elimination of annual rate increases, implementation of reimbursement decreases, or the end of the reduced payments deferment (See also, Item 1., under Government Regulation); and

•an increase in co-payments or deductibles payable by beneficiaries.

Table of Contents

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.

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 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.

Loss of Medicare reimbursement, or a delay or default by the government in making Medicare payments, would also have a material adverse effect on our revenue. Non-compliance with Medicare regulations exist, and any penalty, suspension, termination, or other sanction under any state’s Medicaid program could lead to reciprocal and commensurate penalties being imposed under the Medicare program, up to termination or rescission of our Medicare participation and payor agreements as noted above.

A significant portion of reimbursement for skilled nursing services comes from Medicaid. 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.

The Medicaid program and its reimbursement rates and rules are subject to frequent change at both the federal and state level, including through changes in laws, regulations, rate adjustments (including retroactive adjustments), administrative or executive orders and government funding restrictions, all of which may materially adversely affect the rates at which our services are reimbursed by state Medicaid plans or the amount of expense we incur.

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.

State-level direct spending requirements could negatively impact our results of operations.

Certain states where the Company operates have implemented direct spending requirements requiring SNFs to spend a portion of their revenue, particularly including Medicaid-derived revenue, on expenses directly relating to care. These spending requirements could affect our operational results and place the Company at higher risk of suffering non-compliance consequences, such as penalties, pay-backs, restrict admissions and/or operational/financial penalties.

Table of Contents

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. 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.

Reforms to the U.S. healthcare system, including new regulations under the ACA, continue to impose new requirements upon us that could materially impact our business.

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. 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.

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.

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. 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. 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.

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.

Table of Contents

We cannot predict what effect future reforms to the U.S. healthcare system will have on our business, including the demand for our services or the amount of reimbursement available for those services. However, it is possible these new laws may lower reimbursement or increase the cost of doing business and adversely affect our business.

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.

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.

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.

We continually monitor these developments in order to respond to the changing regulatory environment impacting 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.

We are subject to various government reviews, audits and investigations that could adversely affect our business, including an obligation to refund amounts previously paid to us, potential criminal charges, the imposition of fines, and/or the loss of our right to participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs.

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 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 2022, CMS updated guidance for Phase 2 and 3 of the requirements of participation, discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation. The application of CMS’s new guidance could result in more aggressive and stringent surveys, and potential fines, penalties, sanctions, or administrative actions taken against our independent subsidiaries. Also described in Item 1., under Government Regulation, the Interoperability Final Rule and its changes intended to facilitate data exchange between and among patients, providers, and payors, will be implemented beginning in 2026 and must be fully implemented by January 1, 2027. This rule and the greater access to and use of data between and among payors transmitting funds for state and federal healthcare programs, may also trigger additional scrutiny or review of facilities such as ours, and may adversely affect our reimbursement paid through state and federal programs including Medicaid.

Table of Contents

CMS announced a new nationwide audit the “SNF 5-Claim Probe & Educate Review,” in which the Medicare Administrative Contractors will review five claims from each of the facilities to check for compliance with PDPM billings, which could result in individual claim payment denials if errors are identified. All facilities that are not undergoing Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) reviews, or have not recently passed a TPE review, will be subject to the nationwide audit.

We believe that billing and reimbursement errors and disagreements are common in our industry, and thus we are regularly engaged in reviews, audits and appeals of our claims for reimbursement due to the subjectivities inherent in the process related to patient diagnosis and care, record keeping, claims processing and other aspects of the patient service and reimbursement processes, and the errors and disagreements those subjectivities can produce. An adverse review, audit or investigation could result in:

•an obligation to refund amounts previously paid to us pursuant to the Medicare or Medicaid programs or from private payors, in amounts that could be material to our business;

•state or federal agencies imposing fines, penalties or other sanctions on us;

•temporary or permanent loss of our right to participate in the Medicare or Medicaid programs or one or more private payor networks;

•an increase in private litigation against us; and

•damage to our reputation in the geographies served by our independent subsidiaries.

Although we have always been subject to post-payment audits and reviews, more intensive “probe reviews” performed by Medicare administrative contractors in recent years appear to be a regular procedure with our fiscal intermediaries. All findings of overpayment from CMS contractors are eligible for appeal. With the exception of rare findings of overpayment related to objective errors in Medicare payment methodology or claims processing, we utilize all defenses reasonably available to us to demonstrate that the services provided meet all clinical and regulatory requirements for reimbursement.

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. We anticipate that these reviews could increase in frequency in the future.

Additionally, both federal and state government agencies have heightened and coordinated civil and criminal enforcement efforts as part of numerous ongoing investigations of healthcare companies and, in particular, SNFs. The focus of these investigations includes, among other things, billing and cost reporting practices; quality of care provided; financial relationships with referral sources; and the medical necessity of rendered services. For example, refer to the matter discussed in Part I, Item 3., Legal Proceedings.

If we should agree to a settlement of claims or obligations under Medicare statutes, the FCA, or similar federal or state statutes and related regulations, our business, financial condition and results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected, and our stock price could be adversely impacted. Among other things, any settlement or litigation could involve the payment of substantial sums to settle any alleged civil violations and may also include our assumption of specific procedural and financial obligations going forward under a corporate integrity agreement or other arrangement with the government.

If the government or a court were to conclude that errors and deficiencies constitute criminal violations and/or that such errors and deficiencies resulted in the submission of false claims to federal healthcare programs, or were to discover other problems in addition to the ones identified by the probe reviews that rose to actionable levels, we and certain of our officers might face potential criminal charges and civil claims, administrative sanctions and penalties for amounts that could be material to our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, we or some of the key personnel of our independent subsidiaries could be temporarily or permanently excluded from future participation in state and federal healthcare reimbursement programs such as Medicaid and Medicare.

Table of Contents

If any of our independent subsidiaries is decertified or loses its licenses, our revenue, financial condition or results of operations would be adversely affected. In addition, the report of such issues at any of our independent subsidiaries could harm our reputation for quality care and lead to a reduction in the patient referrals to and ultimately a reduction in occupancy at these facilities. Also, responding to auditing and enforcement efforts diverts material time, resources and attention away from our management team and our staff, and could have a materially detrimental impact on our results of operations during and after any such investigation or proceedings, regardless of whether we prevail on the underlying claim.

We are subject to extensive and complex laws and government regulations. If we are not operating in compliance with these laws and regulations or if these laws and regulations change, we could be required to make significant expenditures or change our operations in order to bring our facilities and operations into compliance.

We, along with other companies in the healthcare industry, are required to comply with extensive and complex laws and regulations at the federal, state and local government levels relating to, among other things:

•licensure and certification;

•disclosure of ownership and affiliated parties;

•adequacy and quality of healthcare services;

•qualifications of healthcare and support personnel;

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

•quality and maintenance of medical equipment and facilities;

•confidentiality, maintenance and security issues associated with medical records and claims processing;

•relationships with physicians and other referral sources and recipients;

•constraints on protective contractual provisions with patients and third-party payors;

•operating policies and procedures;

•addition of facilities and services; and

•billing for services.

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. 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.

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.

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, we are subject to federal and state laws intended to prevent healthcare fraud and abuse. Possible sanctions for violation of any of these laws and regulations include loss of eligibility to participate in federal and state reimbursement programs and civil and criminal penalties. If we fail to comply, even inadvertently, with any of these requirements, we could be required to alter our operations, refund payments to the government, enter into a corporate integrity agreement, deferred prosecution or similar agreements with state or federal government agencies, and become subject to significant civil and criminal penalties.

Table of Contents

These anti-fraud and abuse laws and regulations are complex, and we do not always have the benefit of significant regulatory or judicial interpretation of these laws and regulations. While we do not believe we are in violation of these prohibitions, we cannot assure you that governmental officials charged with the responsibility for enforcing these prohibitions will not assert that we are violating the provisions of such laws and regulations.

We are unable to predict the future course of federal, state and local regulation or legislation, including as it pertains to Medicare, Medicaid, or fraud and abuse laws, and how they are enforced. Changes in the regulatory framework, our failure to obtain or renew required regulatory approvals, credentials, qualifications, or licenses or to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, or the imposition of other enforcement sanctions, fines or penalties could have a material adverse effect upon our business, financial condition or results of operations. Furthermore, should we lose licenses or certifications for a number of our facilities or other businesses as a result of regulatory action or legal proceedings, we could be deemed to be in default under some of our agreements, including agreements governing outstanding indebtedness.

Public and government calls for increased survey and enforcement efforts toward SNFs, past and potential rulemaking that results in enhanced enforcement and penalties, could result in increased scrutiny by state and federal survey agencies. In addition, potential sanctions and remedies based upon alleged regulatory deficiencies could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

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.

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.

Although most inspection deficiencies are resolved through an agreed-upon plan of corrective action, the reviewing agency typically has the authority to take further action against a licensed or certified facility. These remedial actions could result in the imposition of fines, imposition of a license to a conditional or provisional status, suspension or revocation of a license, suspension or denial of payment for new admissions, loss of certification as a provider under state or federal healthcare programs, or imposition of other sanctions, including criminal penalties. In the past, we have experienced inspection deficiencies that have resulted in the imposition of a provisional license and could experience these results in the future.

Furthermore, in some states, citation of one independent subsidiary could negatively impact other independent subsidiaries in the same state. Revocation of a license at a given facility could therefore impair our ability to obtain new licenses or to renew, or maintain, existing licenses at other facilities, which may also trigger defaults or cross-defaults under our leases and our credit arrangements, or adversely affect our ability to operate or obtain financing in the future. Our failure to comply with applicable legal and regulatory requirements in any single facility could negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Table of Contents

From time to time, we have opted to voluntarily stop accepting new patients pending completion of a revisit survey, in order to avoid possible denial of payment for new admissions during the deficiency cure period, or simply to avoid straining staff and other resources while retraining staff, upgrading operating systems or making other operational improvements.

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.

CMS’s changes to the SFF program and its look-back period may create greater risk of our facilities being subject to this program and subject to potential fines and sanctions, even after graduating from the SFF program.

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.

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. 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. 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.

Any of our facilities’ loss of a Medicare or Medicaid contract would significantly harm the financial performance of that facility. Additionally, if CMS perceived there to be common upstream ownership of multiple facilities that were participants in or graduates of the SFF program, CMS may seek to take enforcement actions against those other facilities due to their common ownership based on another facility’s deficiencies after graduating the SFF program, with CMS imposing penalties up to and potentially including termination of those SNFs’ participation in the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs.

Table of Contents

Federal minimum staffing mandates may adversely affect our labor costs, ability to maintain desired levels of patient or resident capacity, and profitability.

On April 22, 2024, CMS issued the Staffing Rule, establishing minimum staffing standards for SNFs. As discussed in more detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, the Staffing Rule contains three primary staffing requirements which are phased in over the next several years. Due to pending legislation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, industry litigation filed to dispute the Staffing Rule's validity and enforceability, as well as the long phase-in of the Staffing Rule's requirements, the exact effects of the Staffing Rule cannot yet be ascertained. Given the pending legislation before both houses of Congress, change in control of the Presidency, changes in leadership of HHS and CMS, and change in control of the Senate following the 2024 presidential election, future developments may significantly alter or even halt the implementation of the Staffing Rule. However, we expect that the Staffing Rule in its current form will have adverse financial consequences upon our business unless or until it is repealed, enjoined, or otherwise prevented from taking effect.

We may be required to hire substantially more staff members, particularly nurse practitioners, registered nurses, and nursing aides than currently staffed. This sudden demand across the SNF industry may exacerbate an already difficult labor market, with demand for nursing staff far outstripping the supply of qualified individuals, and the salary requirements of both current and prospective staff increasing markedly to increase the likelihood of recruiting and retaining skilled caregivers.

Future cost containment initiatives undertaken by private third-party payors may limit our revenue and profitability.

Our non-Medicare and non-Medicaid revenue and profitability are affected by continuing efforts of third-party payors to maintain or reduce costs of healthcare, such as by lowering payment rates, narrowing the scope of covered services, increasing case management review of services and negotiating pricing. In addition, sustained unfavorable economic conditions may affect the number of patients enrolled in managed care programs and the profitability of managed care companies, which could result in reduced payment rates.

Third-party payors may not make timely payments for our services, and we may be unable to maintain our current payor or revenue mix. We are continuing our efforts to develop our non-Medicare and non-Medicaid sources of revenue and any changes in payment levels from current or future third-party payors could have a material adverse effect on our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

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. 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.

We may be subject to increased investigation and enforcement activities related to HIPAA violations.

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.

Table of Contents

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.

Security breaches and other cyber-security incidents could violate security laws and subject us to significant liability.

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. 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. 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.

On occasion, we have acquired additional information systems through our business acquisitions, and these acquired systems may expose us to risk. We also license certain third-party software to support our operations and information systems. Our inability, or the inability of third-party vendors, to continue to maintain and upgrade information systems and software could disrupt or reduce the efficiency of our operations. In addition, costs and potential problems and interruptions associated with the implementation of new or upgraded systems and technology or with maintenance or adequate support of existing systems also could disrupt or reduce the efficiency of our operations.

A cyber-attack or other incident that bypasses the security measures of our information systems could cause a security breach, which may lead to a material disruption to our information systems infrastructure or business, significant costs to remediate (e.g., data recovery) and may involve a significant loss of business or patient health information. If a cyber-attack or other unauthorized attempt to access our systems or facilities were successful, it could also result in the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of confidential information or intellectual property, and could cause operational or business delays that may materially impact our ability to provide various healthcare services.

We may not be fully reimbursed for all services for which each facility bills through consolidated billing, which could adversely affect our revenue, financial condition and results of operations.

SNFs are required to perform consolidated billing for certain items and services furnished to patients and residents. The consolidated billing requirement requires the SNF to effectively bill for the entire package of care that its patients receive in these situations.

Table of Contents

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.

Our success depends upon our ability to retain and attract nurses and other skilled personnel, such as Certified Nurse Assistants, social workers and speech, physical and occupational therapists, as well as skilled management personnel responsible for day-to-day facility operation. Each facility has a facility leader responsible for the overall day-to-day operations of the facility, including quality of care, social services and financial performance. Depending upon the size of the facility, each facility leader is supported by facility staff who are directly responsible for day-to-day care of the patients, marketing and community outreach programs. Other key positions supporting each facility may include individuals responsible for physical, occupational and speech therapy, food service and maintenance. We compete with various healthcare service providers, including other skilled nursing providers, in retaining and attracting qualified and skilled personnel.

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.

If a facility is determined to be out of compliance with these requirements, it may be subject to a notice of deficiency, a citation, or a significant fine or litigation risk, with penalties including the suspension of patient admissions and the termination of Medicaid participation, or the suspension, revocation or non-renewal of the SNF's license.

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.

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 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.

Similar state-level requirements in the states where our independent SNFs operate, whether such requirements are passed by statute, regulation, or executive order, may result in a shortage or inability to obtain nurses and skilled staff. Prior concerns about the COVID-19 vaccination IFR may be abated by the Omnibus Final Rule’s withdrawal of that IFR. The withdrawal of the COVID-19 vaccination IFR may allow for nursing and other personnel unwilling to receive the COVID-19 vaccination to re-enter the workforce for Medicare-certified facilities and increase the pool of hirable talent.

Table of Contents

Increased competition for, or a shortage of, nurses or other trained personnel, or general ongoing inflationary pressures may require that we enhance our pay and benefits packages to compete effectively for such personnel. For skilled workers within the skilled care market where we operate, the costs of skilled labor, which are already greater than unskilled labor, could increase further. Similarly, the increased minimum wage of unskilled labor will not only increase the cost of unskilled labor but may also have effects that dissuade workers from training to join the skilled workforce to earn higher wage growth, resulting in a smaller pool of available skilled workers and further increased competition—and higher wages—for them. If we fail to attract and retain qualified and skilled personnel, our ability to conduct our business operations could be harmed.

Annual caps and other cost-reductions for outpatient therapy services may reduce our future revenue and profitability or cause us to incur losses.

As discussed in detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, sub-heading Part B Rehabilitation Requirements, several government actions have been taken in recent years to try and contain the costs of rehabilitation therapy services provided under Medicare Part B, including the MPPR, institution of annual caps, mandatory medical reviews for annual claims beyond a certain monetary threshold, and a reduction in reimbursement rates. Such cost-containment measures and ongoing payment changes could have an adverse effect on our revenue.

The Office of the Inspector General or other regulatory authorities may choose to more closely scrutinize billing practices in areas where we operate or propose to expand, which could result in an increase in regulatory monitoring and oversight, decreased reimbursement rates, or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As discussed in greater detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation, Civil and Criminal Fraud and Abuse Laws and Enforcement, the OIG regularly conducts investigations regarding certain payment or compliance issues within the healthcare industry. The OIG identified SNF compliance as an issue of concern in its 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 semi-annual reports to Congress. In June 2024, the OIG continued to focus on SNFs, adding the SFF Program to its Work Plan. The OIG's January 2023 study regarding SNF emergency preparedness identified the need for further oversight and addition of SNF emergency readiness to the OIG's fall 2023 work plan. In November of 2023, OIG added to its work plan an audit of nursing homes' nurse staffing hours reported in CMS's payroll-based journal, for which OIG expects to issue a report in FY 2025. Nursing homes were also a topic of discussion in the OIG’s 2023 semiannual report to Congress, which emphasized the continued protection and oversight of care that nursing facilities provide to residents. Among other things, the OIG recommended attention to the rate of reimbursement for professional services rendered within facilities. Based on this information, SNFs in particular are potential targets for more robust scrutiny and examination by regulators. Following the 2024 presidential election, it is not yet known whether the new Presidential Administration will follow the same policies and seek further or escalating scrutiny of SNFs, or whether it will retain any or all of the Biden-Harris Administration’s priorities regarding SNFs.

To respond to the local community needs and the shifting of higher acuity patients from the acute care setting to the SNF setting, over time our overall patient mix has consistently shifted to higher acuity and higher-resource utilization patients in most facilities we operate. We also use specialized care-delivery software that assists our caregivers in more accurately capturing and recording activities of daily living services, among other things. These efforts may place us under greater scrutiny with the OIG, CMS, our fiscal intermediaries, recovery audit contractors and others.

State efforts to regulate or deregulate the healthcare services industry or the construction or expansion of healthcare facilities could impair our ability to expand our operations, or could result in increased competition.

Some states require healthcare providers, including SNFs, to obtain prior approval, known as a certificate of need, for: (1) the purchase, construction or expansion of healthcare facilities; (2) capital expenditures exceeding a prescribed amount; or (3) changes in services or bed capacity.

Table of Contents

Other states that do not require certificates of need have effectively barred the expansion of existing facilities and the establishment of new ones by placing partial or complete moratoria on the number of new Medicaid beds those states will certify in certain areas or throughout the entire state. Still other states have established such stringent development standards and approval procedures for constructing new healthcare facilities that the construction of new facilities, or the expansion or renovation of existing facilities, may become cost-prohibitive or extremely time-consuming. In addition, some states require the approval of the state Attorney General for acquisition of a facility being operated by a non-profit organization.

Our ability to acquire or construct new facilities or expand or provide new services at existing facilities would be adversely affected if we are unable to obtain the necessary approvals, if there are changes in the standards applicable to those approvals, or if we experience delays and increased expenses associated with obtaining those approvals. We may not be able to obtain licensure, certificate of need approval, Medicaid certification, state Attorney General approval or other necessary approvals for future expansion projects. Conversely, the elimination or reduction of state regulations that limit the construction, expansion or renovation of new or existing facilities could result in increased competition to us or result in overbuilding of facilities in some of our markets. If overbuilding in the skilled nursing industry in the markets in which we operate were to occur, it could reduce the occupancy rates of existing facilities and, in some cases, might reduce the private rates that we charge for our services.

A bill in the State of California was signed into law which increases the cap of non-economic damages awarded to plaintiffs who are successful in medical malpractice litigation. The cap increases from $0.25 million to $0.35 million beginning on January 1, 2023, then increases over the following 10 years until the cap reaches a maximum of $0.75 million, with further adjustments for inflation. In wrongful death cases, the cap increases from $0.25 million to $0.5 million on January 1, 2023, with incremental increases over the following 10 years until the cap reaches a maximum of $1.0 million, with adjustments for inflation. While there may be additional claims and litigation that arise from the Supreme Court's decision that have an adverse impact on our cash flow, it is not expected that the decision will have a significant impact on our business.

Another example, California’s adoption of the Skilled Nursing Facility Ownership and Management Reform Act of 2022, discussed in Item 1., Government Regulation, imposes new requirements for obtaining licenses to operate SNFs. These new requirements may delay or limit the ability to obtain new SNF licenses within that state, whether through acquisition of existing facilities or opening a new facility. This new law's obligations may increase the costs of obtaining licensure, make applications more time-consuming and complex, and may result in civil penalties and other sanctions against our independent subsidiaries in the event they are not compliant with these new licensure application requirements. As a result, this new law may delay or impede growth within California. As with the bill that increases the cap of non-economic damages for medical malpractice litigation, California’s influence on other states may result in this legislation becoming a model for other states and having similar, potentially adverse effects within those jurisdictions as well.

Effective October 2024, California law SB525 increased the minimum wage for healthcare workers. However, the law will only impact SNFs upon passage of a companion bill imposing minimum direct spending requirements upon SNFs. For the 2023-2024 California legislative session, this minimum spending bill took the form of AB1537 and, as of October 2024 has been placed in suspense without further action. A future bill may still be passed that would trigger SB525's requirements for healthcare workers in SNFs to receive higher minimum wages. As discussed in Item 1., Government Regulation, these proposed bills would create new and costly obligations on our independent subsidiaries if they became law and if enacted, would adversely affect our business, operations, and profitability.

As another example, Texas passed a bill which partially restored Medicaid state relief funding for SNFs through August 31, 2023, while it also considered legislation that contained direct care spending requirements and ownership, similar to proposed federal rulemaking discussed in Item 1., Government Regulation. While this bill provided financial relief to our independent subsidiaries in Texas, other proposed bills may impose the same regulatory requirements and limitations inherent in both the proposed legislation in other states and the federally proposed rule requiring disclosure of such information in applications and change-of-ownership disclosures, which may adversely affect our business, operations, and profitability.

Table of Contents

Changes to federal and state employment-related laws and regulations could increase our cost of doing business.

Our independent subsidiaries are subject to a variety of federal and state employment-related laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act that governs such matters as minimum wages, overtime and other working conditions, the ADA and similar state laws that provide civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities in the context of employment, public accommodations and other areas, the National Labor Relations Act, regulations of the EEOC, regulations of the Office of Civil Rights, regulations of state attorney generals, family leave mandates and a variety of similar laws enacted by the federal and state governments that govern these and other employment law matters. Changes to federal and state regulations and laws are discussed in more detail in Item 1., under Government Regulation.

The incoming Presidential Administration, as well as new leadership of HHS or CMS, may discontinue these studies, discontinue ongoing rulemaking activity, and may pursue significantly different policy-setting and rulemaking priorities that do not include any of the Biden-Harris Administration’s priorities. Simultaneously, certain actions taken under the Biden-Harris Administration, such as increased enforcement authority by HHS and CMS, may be retained and utilized by the incoming Presidential Administration and its new leaders of HHS and CMS.

Other pending legislation, such as the HCBS Access Act, indicated a legislative priority of providing funding for care-based careers that may affect our pool of desired workers. Due to a change of political party control of both houses of Congress, though, such legislation may have a lower likelihood of passing, even if reintroduced in a subsequent congress.

The compliance costs associated with these laws and evolving regulations could be substantial. By way of example, all of our independent subsidiaries are required to comply with the ADA, which has separate compliance requirements for “public accommodations” and “commercial properties,” but generally requires that buildings be made accessible to people with disabilities. Compliance with ADA requirements could require removal of access barriers and non-compliance could result in imposition of government fines or an award of damages to private litigants. Further legislation may impose additional burdens or restrictions with respect to access by disabled persons. In addition, federal proposals to introduce a system of mandated health insurance and flexible work time and other similar initiatives could, if implemented, adversely affect our operations. We also may be subject to employee-related claims such as wrongful discharge, discrimination or violation of equal employment law.

Required regulatory approvals could delay or prohibit transfers of our healthcare operations, which could result in periods in which we are unable to receive reimbursement for such properties.

The operations of our independent subsidiaries must be licensed under applicable state law and, depending upon the type of operation, certified or approved as providers under the Medicare and/or Medicaid programs. In the process of acquiring or transferring operating assets, our operations must receive change of ownership approvals from state licensing agencies, Medicare and Medicaid as well as third-party payors. Proposed rules regarding the disclosure of SNF facility ownership, if made effective, may increase the scrutiny placed on companies that operate, directly or indirectly, multiple SNFs, and may subject our licensing and approval process to additional scrutiny or delays. If there are any delays in receiving regulatory approvals from the applicable federal, state or local government agencies, or the inability to receive such approvals, such delays or denials could result in delayed or lost reimbursement related to periods of service prior to the receipt of such approvals, which could negatively impact our cash position.

Compliance with federal and state fair housing, fire, safety and other regulations may require us to make unanticipated expenditures, which could be costly to us.

We must comply with the federal Fair Housing Act and similar state laws, which prohibit us from discriminating against individuals if it would cause such individuals to face barriers in gaining residency in any of our independent subsidiaries. We may be required, among other things, to change our marketing techniques to comply with these requirements.

Table of Contents

In addition, our independent subsidiaries are required to operate in compliance with applicable fire and safety regulations, building codes and other land use regulations and food licensing or certification requirements as they may be adopted by governmental agencies and bodies from time to time. Like other healthcare facilities, our independent SNFs are subject to periodic surveys or inspections by governmental authorities to assess and assure compliance with regulatory requirements. Surveys occur on a regular (often annual or biannual) schedule, and special surveys may result from a specific complaint filed by a patient, a family member or one of our competitors. We may be required to make substantial capital expenditures to comply with these requirements. In some cases, we may be unable to comply with new regulations prior to their effective date exposing us to potential fines or regulatory action.

We depend largely upon reimbursement from third-party payors, and our revenue, financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted by any changes in the acuity mix of patients in our independent subsidiaries as well as payor mix and payment methodologies.

Our revenue is affected by the percentage of the patients of our independent subsidiaries who require a high level of skilled nursing and rehabilitative care, whom we refer to as high acuity patients, and by our mix of payment sources. Changes in the acuity level of patients we attract, as well as our payor mix among Medicaid, Medicare, private payors and managed care companies, significantly affect our profitability. We generally receive higher reimbursement rates for high acuity patients, and payors reimburse us at different rates. If our labor or other operating costs increase, we will be unable to recover such increased costs from government payors. Accordingly, if we fail to maintain our proportion of high acuity patients or if there is any significant increase in the percentage of the patients of our independent subsidiaries for whom we receive Medicaid reimbursement, our results of operations may be adversely affected.

Initiatives undertaken by major insurers and managed care companies to contain healthcare costs may adversely affect our business. These tactics include contracting with healthcare providers to obtain services on a discounted basis. We believe that this trend will continue and may limit reimbursements for healthcare services. If insurers or managed care companies from whom we receive substantial payments were to reduce the amounts they pay for services and we did not wish to accept such reductions, we may lose patients if we choose not to renew our contracts with these insurers at lower rates. Additionally, trade publications within the healthcare industry have reported on the trend of payors using the No Surprises Act as a means to force re-negotiation of reimbursement rates for providers and facilities, leading to litigation between these providers and/or facilities against payors and it may adversely affect us as well.

As discussed under Item 1., Government Regulation, the Biden-Harris Administration requested HHS and CMS conduct studies to evaluate potential staffing, data reporting, employee compensation and retention, and resident experience regulations that may result in a reduction of our revenue from Medicare and Medicaid. CMS first requested information regarding these priorities in 2022 and subsequently published further requests for information from the public in the Federal Register to aid in studies and anticipated rulemaking. The change in Presidential Administration, including new leadership of HHS and CMS, may result in a change in these priorities, and this prior research and rulemaking may be materially altered or abandoned. Certain results of the Biden-Harris Administration’s rulemaking, including enhanced enforcement ability, may be retained under the new Presidential Administration. We continue to monitor this area and look for public disclosures from the incoming Presidential Administration and expected heads of HHS and CMS to better anticipate what policy priorities and changes we can expect regarding Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, including payment models and factors affecting our independent subsidiaries’ reimbursement for the services they provide.

We are subject to litigation that could result in significant legal costs and large settlement amounts or damage awards.

The skilled nursing business involves a significant risk of liability given the age and health of the patients and residents of our independent subsidiaries and the services we provide. The industry has experienced an increased trend in the number and severity of litigation claims, due in part to the number of large verdicts, including large punitive damage awards. These claims are filed based upon a wide variety of claims and theories, including deficiencies under conditions of participation under certain state and federal healthcare programs. Plaintiffs' attorneys have become increasingly more aggressive in their pursuit of claims against healthcare providers, including skilled nursing providers, employing a wide variety of advertising and solicitation activities to generate more claims. The increased caps on damages awarded in such actions, as discussed above, may trigger a larger number of these lawsuits against our independent subsidiaries in California and other states that adopt similar legislation. The defense of lawsuits has in the past, and may in the future, result in significant legal costs, regardless of the outcome. Additionally, increases to the frequency and/or severity of losses from such claims and suits may result in increased liability insurance premiums or a decline in available insurance coverage levels, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition to carrying third-party liability insurance, our captive insurance subsidiary provides professional liability and general liability insurance to various

Table of Contents

independent subsidiaries. See the risk factor titled “Our self-insurance programs may expose us to significant and unexpected costs and losses.”

We have in the past been subject to class action litigation involving claims of violations of various regulatory requirements and been able to settle these claims without an ongoing material adverse effect on our business. Future claims could be brought that may materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Other claims and suits, including class actions, continue to be filed against us and other companies in our industry. For example, there has been a general increase in the number of wage and hour class action claims filed in several of the jurisdictions where we operate, typically based on alleged failures to permit or properly compensate for meal and rest periods, or failure to pay for time worked. If there were a significant increase in the number of these claims against us or an increase in amounts owing should plaintiffs be successful in their claims, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We are subject to potential lawsuits under the FCA and comparable state laws alleging submission of fraudulent claims for services to any healthcare program (such as Medicare or Medicaid) or other payor. Under the qui tam or "whistleblower" provisions of the FCA, a private individual with knowledge of fraud or potential fraud may bring a claim on behalf of the federal government and receive a percentage of the federal government's recovery. Due to these whistleblower incentives, qui tam lawsuits have become more frequent. For example, despite the decision of the DOJ to decline to participate in litigation based on the subject matter of its issued CID, the involved qui tam relator moved forward with the complaint in December 2020. Refer to Part I, Item 3., Legal Proceedings for additional information on this case.

Beyond our skilled nursing business, we engage in numerous ancillary businesses through one or more of our subsidiaries. These ancillary businesses generally support and provide services complementary to our operations, including but not limited to non-emergent ground transportation for patients and residents. Our ancillary businesses may also be the subject of claims, lawsuits, and regulatory oversight that are specific to the particular services they offer. Noncompliance with the laws and regulations that may apply to our ancillary businesses may result in fines, penalties, and civil claims paid by our affected independent subsidiaries. Specific to our non-emergent ground transportation business, the drivers employed by this business may be subject to additional state-specific regulations regarding working time allowed to be spent driving, waiting time, and break or rest periods, and violations of these rules may lead to regulatory fines, penalties, or claims to be paid to individual drivers, in addition to the general employment risks described above.

Our ancillary businesses also are susceptible to general liability claims based on facts and circumstances that are specific to their activities and operations, such as claims for automobile-involved accidents against our non-emergent ground transportation business. The defense of claims and lawsuits relating to our ancillary businesses in the past, and may in the future, result in significant legal costs, regardless of the outcome. As our ancillary businesses grow, the independent subsidiaries may be subject to increased frequency and/or severity of losses from such claims and suits which may result in increased liability insurance premiums and decline in available coverage as described above, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, we contract with a variety of landlords, lenders, vendors, suppliers, consultants and other individuals and businesses. These contracts typically contain covenants and default provisions. If the other party to one or more of our contracts were to allege that we have violated the contract terms, we could be subject to civil liabilities which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

If a court in such litigation decided to disregard the corporate form, the resulting judgment could increase our liability and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Congress has repeatedly considered, without passage, a bill that would require, among other things, that agreements to arbitrate nursing home disputes be made after the dispute has arisen rather than before prospective patients move in, to prevent nursing home operators and prospective patients from mutually entering into a pre-admission, pre-dispute arbitration agreement. This bill, known as the Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act, was introduced in the House of Representatives in 2021; the bill and its analogue introduced in the Senate have never made it out of the committees to which they were referred for discussion. The Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act was re-introduced in the House of Representatives on January 29, 2024 and was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Energy and Commerce. No action has been taken since these referrals of the bill to these committees.

Table of Contents

Our independent subsidiaries use arbitration agreements, which have generally been favored by the courts, to streamline the dispute resolution process and reduce our exposure to legal fees and excessive jury awards. CMS has identified these arbitration agreements as an area of focus and issued guidance to state surveyors regarding federal requirements for the use of arbitration agreements in nursing home care, with non-compliance potentially resulting in fines and other sanctions. If we are not able to secure pre-admission arbitration agreements, our litigation exposure and costs of defense in patient liability actions could increase, our liability insurance premiums could increase, and our business may be adversely affected.

The outcomes of any of these litigation matters are difficult to predict and litigation and other legal claims are subject to inherent uncertainties. Those uncertainties include, but are not limited to, litigation costs and attorneys’ fees, unpredictable judicial or jury decisions and the differing laws and judicial proclivities regarding damage awards among the states in which we operate. A further complication is that even where the possibility of an adverse outcome is remote under traditional legal analysis, juries sometimes substitute their subjective views in place of facts and established legal principles. Unexpected outcomes in such legal proceedings, or changes in management’s evaluation or predictions of the likely outcomes of such proceedings (possibly resulting in changes in established reserves) could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We conduct regular internal investigations into the care delivery, recordkeeping and billing processes of our independent subsidiaries. These reviews sometimes detect instances of noncompliance which we attempt to correct, which can decrease our revenue.

Our compliance program includes, among other things, (1) policies and procedures modeled after applicable laws, regulations, sub-regulatory guidance and industry practices and customs that govern the clinical, reimbursement and operational aspects of our subsidiaries; (2) training about our compliance process for all of the employees of our independent subsidiaries, our directors and officers, and training about Medicare and Medicaid laws, fraud and abuse prevention, clinical standards and practices, and claim submission and reimbursement policies and procedures for appropriate employees; and (3) internal controls that monitor, among other things, the accuracy of claims, reimbursement submissions, cost reports and source documents, provision of patient care, services, and supplies as required by applicable standards and laws, accuracy of clinical assessment and treatment documentation, and implementation of judicial and regulatory requirements (i.e., background checks, licensing and training).

From time to time our systems and controls highlight potential compliance issues, which we investigate as they arise.

Through these internal inquiries, we have identified potential deficiencies in the assessment of and recordkeeping for small subsets of patients. We have assisted in implementing, targeted improvements in the assessment and recordkeeping practices to make them consistent with the existing standards and policies applicable to our independent subsidiaries. We continue to monitor the measures implemented for effectiveness and perform follow-up reviews to ensure compliance. Consistent with healthcare industry accounting practices, we record any charge for refunded payments against revenue in the period in which the claim adjustment becomes known.

If additional reviews result in identification and quantification of additional amounts to be refunded, we will accrue additional liabilities for claim costs and interest, and repay any amounts due in normal course and within the time permitted by law. Failure to refund overpayments within required time frames (as described in greater detail above) could result in FCA liability and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and our stock price could decline.

To date, our revenue growth has been significantly impacted by our acquisition of new facilities and businesses. Subject to general market conditions and the availability of essential resources and leadership within our company, we continue to seek both single-and multi-facility acquisition and business acquisition opportunities that are consistent with our geographic, financial and operating objectives.

Table of Contents

We face competition for the acquisition of facilities and businesses and expect this competition to increase. Based upon factors such as our ability to identify suitable acquisition candidates, future regulations affecting our ability to purchase facilities, the purchase price of the facilities, increasing interest rates for debt-financed purchases, prevailing market conditions, the availability of leadership to manage new facilities and our own willingness to take on new operations, the rate at which we have historically acquired facilities has fluctuated significantly. In the future, we anticipate the rate at which we may acquire facilities will continue to fluctuate, which may affect our revenue.

We may not be able to successfully or efficiently integrate new acquisitions of assets and businesses with our existing independent subsidiaries, culture and systems. The process of integrating acquisitions into our existing operations may result in unforeseen operating difficulties, divert management's attention from existing operations, or require an unexpected commitment of staff and financial resources, and may ultimately be unsuccessful. Existing operations available for acquisition frequently serve or target different markets than those that we currently serve. We also may determine that renovations of acquired facilities and changes in staff and operating management personnel are necessary to successfully integrate those acquisitions into our existing operations. We may not be able to recover the costs incurred to reposition or renovate newly independent subsidiaries. The financial benefits we expect to realize from many of our acquisitions are largely dependent upon our ability to improve clinical performance, overcome regulatory deficiencies, rehabilitate or improve the reputation of the operations in the community, increase and maintain occupancy, control costs, and in some cases change the patient acuity mix. If we are unable to accomplish any of these objectives at the independent subsidiaries we acquire, we will not realize the anticipated benefits and we may experience lower than anticipated profits, or even losses.

This growth has placed and will continue to place significant demands on our current management resources. Our ability to manage our growth effectively and to successfully integrate new acquisitions into our existing business will require us to continue to expand our operational, financial and management information systems and to continue to retain, attract, train, motivate and manage key employees, including facility-level leaders and our local directors of nursing. We may not be successful in attracting qualified individuals necessary for future acquisitions to be successful, and our management team may expend significant time and energy working to attract qualified personnel to manage operations we may acquire in the future. If we are not able to successfully overcome these and other integration challenges, we may not achieve the benefits we expect from any of our acquisitions, and our business may suffer.

In undertaking acquisitions, we may be adversely impacted by costs, liabilities and regulatory issues that may adversely affect our operations.

In undertaking acquisitions, we also may be adversely impacted by unforeseen liabilities attributable to the prior providers who operated those businesses, against whom we may have little or no recourse. These may include, without limitation, payment recoupment related to our predecessors' prior noncompliance, the imposition of fines, penalties, operational restrictions or special regulatory status. Further, we may incur post-acquisition compliance risk due to the difficulty or impossibility of immediately or quickly bringing non-compliant operations into full compliance. Diligence materials pertaining to acquisition targets, especially the underperforming facilities that often represent the greatest opportunity for return, are often inadequate, inaccurate or impossible to obtain, sometimes requiring us to make acquisition decisions with incomplete information. Despite our due diligence procedures, operations that we have acquired or may acquire in the future may generate unexpectedly low returns, may cause us to incur substantial losses, may require unexpected levels of management time, expenditures or other resources, or may otherwise not meet a risk profile that our investors find acceptable.

Table of Contents

In addition, we might encounter unanticipated difficulties and expenditures relating to any of the acquired operations, including contingent liabilities.

We also incur regulatory risk in acquiring certain facilities due to the licensing, certification and other regulatory requirements affecting our right to operate the acquired facilities. For example, in order to acquire facilities on a predictable schedule, or to acquire declining operations quickly to prevent further pre-acquisition declines, we frequently acquire such facilities prior to receiving license approval or provider certification. We operate such facilities as the interim manager for the outgoing licensee, assuming financial responsibility, among other obligations for the facility. To the extent that we may be unable or delayed in obtaining a license, we may need to operate the facility under a management agreement from the prior operator. Any inability in obtaining consent from the prior operator of a target acquisition to utilizing its license in this manner could impact our ability to acquire additional facilities. Further, anticipated future regulations may cause delays in acquiring the required licenses and certifications, if it is possible to do so at all. If we were subsequently denied licensure or certification for any reason, we might not realize the expected benefits of the acquisition and would likely incur unanticipated costs and other challenges which could cause our business to suffer.

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.

As discussed in Item 1., under Government Regulation, CMS provides comparative public data, rating every SNF operating in each state based upon quality-of-care indicators. Certain private organizations engage in similar monitoring and ranking activities. CMS’s system is the Five-Star Quality Rating System which gives each nursing home a rating of between one and five stars in various categories, with five-star ratings harder to obtain over time. The ratings are available on a consumer-facing website, Nursing Home Compare. In cases of acquisitions, the previous operator's clinical ratings are included in our overall Five-Star Quality Rating and the rating may not reflect the improvements we were able to make until it is recalculated. Based on CMS's guidance and regulations, we expect more data to be collected by CMS and reported on the Nursing Home Compare website in the future. Additionally, CMS's ownership transparency final rule, which requires the disclosure of SNF ownership and affiliated parties, will ultimately provide for the public disclosure of information reported to CMS under that rule. Other states, including Iowa and California, have adopted similar statutes and regulations requiring the disclosure of this information.

CMS continues to increase quality measure thresholds, which are regularly increased every six months, making it more difficult to achieve upward and five-star ratings. CMS increased its quality measure thresholds in 2022, making it more difficult for facilities to obtain or maintain four- and five-star ratings. Some facilities may see a decline in their overall five-star rating absent any new inspection information, and as a result the five-star ratings of our independent subsidiaries may decline even as their quality measures remain unchanged or improve. Additionally, on the Nursing Home Compare website, CMS recently began displaying a consumer alert icon next to nursing homes that have been cited on inspection reports for incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation. In 2022, CMS updated the scoring measures used for SNFs to include six dimensions of staffing and turnover.

In July 2023, CMS revised the nursing-home level exclusion criteria used on the administrator turnover measure, adding information regarding its calculation of the staff turnover measure and publishing an updated ratings table, which identifies the points needed for each nursing facility to obtain certain star ratings within its state. This change made it more competitive to obtain a five-star rating, and more difficult to maintain such a rating once achieved. Only 10% of nursing facilities can receive a five-star rating in the state where they operate.

Table of Contents

In September 2023, CMS announced that it will update the staffing level case-mix adjustment methodology and freeze four of the quality measures used in the Nursing Home Five-Star Quality Rating System beginning with the April 2024 refresh of the Nursing Home Compare website data. In April 2024, CMS announced the freezing of four quality measures, with one short-stay measure updated effective October 2024 with the new Discharge Function Score Measure and the other three measures unfrozen in January 2025. CMS has unfrozen its staffing level measures with changes to the time period needed to constitute the cessation of employment for the purposes of turnover measurement. CMS announced that it is changing its staffing rating methodology to give the lowest possible score to and penalize providers that fail to provide staffing data or provide erroneous staffing data. These changes risk our independent subsidiaries’ facilities being incorrectly awarded a lower star rating, or prevented from attaining a deserved higher ranking due to favorable data not being reflected in CMS’s five-star ratings due to the freeze or replacement of certain measures. These lower ratings may cause potential residents to evaluate these independent subsidiaries’ facilities as less desirable, and result in fewer admissions and thus reduced revenue.

CMS will revise the staffing rating thresholds to maintain the same distribution of points for staffing measures that will be affected by this freeze and replacement. Further, CMS will penalize SNFs that submit erroneous data, or fail to submit data, by awarding them the lowest possible rating on that measure. We may be significantly affected if any of our independent subsidiaries fail to submit information for the MDS in 2024, or if CMS deems their MDS submissions to be erroneous. In addition to the uncertainty created by future changes to CMS’s five-star ratings that currently are unknown, the potential negative consequences of freezing unfavorable data may adversely affect our star rating and negatively impact our ability to attract residents.

Providing quality patient care is the cornerstone of our business. We believe that hospitals, physicians and other referral sources refer patients to us in large part because of our reputation for delivering quality care. If we should fail to achieve our internal rating goals or fail to exceed the national average rating on the Five-Star Quality Rating System, including due to nursing and administrative staffing and turnover, or have facilities displaying a consumer alert icon for incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, it may affect our ability to generate referrals, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business and consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we are unable to obtain insurance, or if insurance becomes more costly for us to obtain, our business may be adversely affected.

It may become more difficult and costly for us to obtain coverage for resident care liabilities and other risks, including property, automobile and casualty insurance. For example, the following circumstances may adversely affect our ability to obtain insurance at favorable rates:

•we experience higher-than-expected professional liability, property and casualty, or other types of claims or losses;

•we receive survey deficiencies or citations of higher-than-normal scope or severity;

•we acquire especially troubled operations or facilities that present unattractive risks to current or prospective insurers;

•insurers choose to stop operating or offering policies in certain states due to changes in economic conditions or laws;

•insurers tighten underwriting standards applicable to us or our industry; or

•insurers or reinsurers are unable or unwilling to insure us or the industry at historical premiums and coverage levels.

If any of these potential circumstances were to occur, our insurance carriers may cancel or not renew our policies, or require us to significantly increase our self-insured retention levels or pay substantially higher premiums for the same or reduced coverage for insurance, including workers compensation, property and casualty, automobile, employment practices liability, directors and officers liability, employee healthcare and general and professional liability coverages.

In some states, the law prohibits or limits insurance coverage for the risk of punitive damages arising from professional liability and general liability claims or litigation. Other states where we operate have experienced a withdrawal of insurers from the marketplace due to prior losses, or are at risk of insurers leaving the market due to changes in the law that make it difficult for those insurers to operate within the state. Coverage for punitive damages is also excluded under some insurance policies. As a result, we may be liable for punitive damage awards in these states that either are not covered or are in excess of our insurance policy limits. Claims against us, regardless of their merit or eventual outcome, could also inhibit our ability to attract patients or expand our business and could require our management to devote time to matters unrelated to the day-to-day operation of our business.

Table of Contents

With few exceptions, general and professional, workers compensation and employee health insurance costs have also increased markedly in recent years and are expected to increase in the future. To partially offset these increases, we have increased the amounts of our self-insured retention and deductibles in connection with general and professional liability claims. We also have implemented a self-insurance program for workers compensation in all states, and elected non-subscriber status for workers compensation in Texas. Due to the nature of our business and the residents we serve, including the risk of claims from residents as well as potential governmental action, it may be difficult to complete the underwriting process and obtain insurance at commercially reasonable rates. If we are unable to obtain insurance, or if insurance becomes more costly for us to obtain, or if the coverage levels we can economically obtain decline, our business may be adversely affected.

Our self-insurance programs may expose us to significant and unexpected costs and losses.

We maintain general and professional liability insurance and workers compensation insurance through a wholly-owned captive insurance subsidiary to insure our self-insurance reimbursements and deductibles as part of a continually evolving overall risk management strategy. We establish the insurance loss reserves based on an estimation process that uses information obtained from both company-specific and industry data. The estimation process requires us to continuously monitor and evaluate the life cycle of the claims. Using data obtained from this monitoring and our assumptions about emerging trends, we, along with an independent actuary, develop information about the size of ultimate claims based on our historical experience and other available industry information. The most significant assumptions used in the estimation process include determining the trend in costs, the expected cost of claims incurred but not reported and the expected costs to settle or pay damages with respect to unpaid claims. It is possible, however, that the actual liabilities may exceed our estimates of loss. We may also experience an unexpectedly large number of successful claims or claims that result in costs or liability significantly in excess of our projections. For these and other reasons, our self-insurance reserves could prove to be inadequate, resulting in liabilities in excess of our available insurance and self-insurance. If a successful claim is made against us and it is not covered by our insurance or exceeds the insurance policy limits, our business may be negatively and materially impacted.

Further, because our self-insurance reimbursements under our general and professional liability and workers compensation programs applies on a per claim basis, there is no limit to the maximum number of claims or the total amount for which we could incur liability in any policy period.

We also self-insure our employee health benefits. With respect to our health benefits self-insurance, our reserves and premiums are computed based on a mix of company specific and general industry data that is not specific to our own company. Even with a combination of limited company-specific loss data and general industry data, our loss reserves are based on actuarial estimates that may not correlate to actual loss experience in the future. Therefore, our reserves may prove to be insufficient and we may be exposed to significant and unexpected losses.

The geographic concentration of our independent subsidiaries could leave us vulnerable to an economic downturn, regulatory changes or acts of nature in those areas.

Our independent subsidiaries located in Arizona, California, and Texas account for the majority of our total revenue. As a result of this concentration, the conditions of local economies and real estate markets, changes in governmental rules, presence and participation of insurers, regulations and reimbursement rates or criteria, changes in demographics, state funding, acts of nature and other factors that may result in a decrease in demand and/or reimbursement for skilled nursing services in these states could have a disproportionately adverse effect on our revenue, costs and results of operations. Moreover, since over 21% of our independent subsidiaries are located in California, we are particularly susceptible to revenue loss, cost increase or damage caused by natural disasters such as electrical power shortages, fires, earthquakes or mudslides, or increased liabilities that may arise from regulations as discussed within Item 1., under Government Regulation.

Table of Contents

In addition, our independent subsidiaries in certain states are more susceptible to revenue loss, cost increases or damage caused by natural disasters including hurricanes, tornadoes and flooding. These acts of nature may cause disruption to us, the employees of our independent subsidiaries, which could have an adverse impact on the patients of our independent subsidiaries and our business. In order to provide care for the patients of our independent subsidiaries, we are dependent on consistent and reliable delivery of food, pharmaceuticals, utilities and other goods to our independent subsidiaries, and the availability of employees to provide services. If the delivery of goods or the ability of employees to reach our independent subsidiaries were interrupted in any material respect due to a natural disaster or other reasons, it would have a significant impact on our independent subsidiaries and our business. Furthermore, the impact, or impending threat, of a natural disaster may require that we evacuate one or more facilities, which would be costly and would involve risks, including potentially fatal risks, for the patients. The impact of disasters and similar events is inherently uncertain. Such events could harm the patients and employees of our independent subsidiaries, severely damage or destroy one or more of our independent subsidiaries, harm our business, reputation and financial performance, or otherwise cause our business to suffer in ways that we currently cannot predict.

We continue to maintain our right to inform the employees of our independent subsidiaries about our views of the potential impact of unionization upon the workplace generally and upon individual employees. Historically, the staff at our independent subsidiaries that have been approached to unionize have uniformly rejected union organizing efforts. We previously indicated there may be forthcoming proposed rules from CMS, based on the Biden-Harris Administration's executive orders discussed under Government Regulation in Item 1., as well as potential legislation such as the HCBS Access Act aimed toward providing more resources to those considering care-based careers, may increase the likelihood of employee unionization due to increased emphasis on care-based careers in SNF facilities. The outcome of the 2024 presidential election, including change in control of the Senate and Presidency from the Democratic to the Republican party, may result in a reversal of these orders, significant changes in HHS and CMS policy and rulemaking, and a reduced likelihood of successful legislation that seeks to provide more resources to creating pathways to care-based careers. This change in Presidential Administration may also affect the favorability of unionization efforts before the Department of Labor.

As of December 31, 2024, our independent subsidiaries operated 231 of our 327 facilities under long term lease arrangements. Most of our leases are triple-net leases, which means that, in addition to rent, we are required to pay for the costs related to the property (including property taxes, insurance, and maintenance and repair costs). We are responsible for paying these costs notwithstanding the fact that some of the benefits associated with paying these costs accrue to the landlords as owners of the associated facilities.

Each lease provides that the landlord may terminate the lease for a variety of reasons, including the default in any payment of rent, taxes or other payment obligations or the breach of any other covenant or agreement in the lease. Termination of a lease could result in a default under our debt agreements and could adversely affect our business, financial position or results of operations. There can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with all of our obligations under the leases in the future.

Failure to generate sufficient cash flow to cover required payments or meet operating covenants under our long-term debt, mortgages and long-term operating leases could result in defaults under such agreements and cross-defaults under other debt, mortgage or operating lease arrangements, which could harm our independent subsidiaries and cause us to lose facilities or experience foreclosures.

Our Credit Facility has a borrowing capacity of up to $600.0 million in aggregate principal amount. As of December 31, 2024 and through the filing date of this report, we had no outstanding borrowings under our Credit Facility. Twenty-three of our subsidiaries have mortgage loans insured with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for an aggregate amount of $146.9 million, which subjects these subsidiaries to HUD oversight and periodic inspections. The terms of the mortgage loans range from 25- to 35-years.

Table of Contents

We also have one outstanding promissory note with an aggregate principal amount of approximately $1.5 million as of December 31, 2024. The term of the note is 12 years. Because this promissory note is insured with HUD, our borrower subsidiary under the note is subject to HUD oversight and periodic inspections.

In addition, we had $2.8 billion of future operating lease obligations as of December 31, 2024. We intend to continue financing our independent subsidiaries through mortgage financing, long-term operating leases and other types of financing, including borrowings under our lines of credit and future credit facilities we may obtain.

We may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations to cover required interest, principal and lease payments. In addition, our outstanding Credit Facility and mortgage loans contain restrictive covenants and require us to maintain or satisfy specified coverage tests on a consolidated basis and on a facility or facilities basis. These restrictions and operating covenants include, among other things, requirements with respect to occupancy, debt service coverage, project yield, net leverage ratios, minimum interest coverage ratios and minimum asset coverage ratios. These restrictions may interfere with our ability to obtain additional advances under our Credit Facility or to obtain new financing or to engage in other business activities, which may inhibit our ability to grow our business and increase revenue.

Any non-payment, noncompliance or other default under our financing arrangements could, subject to cure provisions, cause the lender to foreclose upon the facility or facilities securing such indebtedness or, in the case of a lease, cause the lessor to terminate the lease, each with a consequent loss of revenue and asset value to us or a loss of property. Furthermore, in many cases, indebtedness is secured by both a mortgage on one or more facilities, and a guaranty by us. In the event of a default under one of these scenarios, the lender could avoid judicial procedures required to foreclose on real property by declaring all amounts outstanding under the guaranty immediately due and payable, and requiring us to fulfill our obligations to make such payments. If any of these scenarios were to occur, our financial condition would be adversely affected. For tax purposes, a foreclosure on any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure, but would not receive any cash proceeds, which would negatively impact our earnings and cash position. Further, because our mortgages and operating leases generally contain cross-default and cross-collateralization provisions, a default by us related to one facility could affect a significant number of other facilities and their corresponding financing arrangements and operating leases.

Because our term loans, promissory note, bonds, mortgages and lease obligations are fixed expenses and secured by specific assets, and because our revolving loan obligations are secured by virtually all of our assets, if reimbursement rates, patient acuity mix or occupancy levels decline, or if for any reason we are unable to meet our loan or lease obligations, we may not be able to cover our costs and some or all of our assets may become at risk. Our ability to make payments of principal and interest on our indebtedness and to make lease payments on our operating leases depends upon our future performance, which will be subject to general economic conditions, industry cycles and financial, business and other factors affecting our independent subsidiaries, many of which are beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in the future to service our debt or to make lease payments on our operating leases, we may be required, among other things, to seek additional financing in the debt or equity markets, refinance or restructure all or a portion of our indebtedness, sell selected assets, reduce or delay planned capital expenditures or delay or abandon desirable acquisitions. Such measures might not be sufficient to enable us to service our debt or to make lease payments on our operating leases. The failure to make required payments on our debt or operating leases or the delay or abandonment of our planned growth strategy could result in an adverse effect on our future ability to generate revenue and sustain profitability. In addition, any such financing, refinancing or sale of assets might not be available on terms that are economically favorable to us, or at all.

A housing downturn could decrease demand for senior living services.

Seniors often use the proceeds of home sales to fund their admission to senior living facilities. A downturn in the housing markets, including reductions in sales prices caused by increasing mortgage interest rates, economic uncertainty, recession, or a reduction in activity in the market for residential real estate, could adversely affect seniors’ ability to afford our resident fees and entrance fees. If national or local housing markets enter a persistent decline, our occupancy rates, revenues, results of operations and cash flow could be negatively impacted.

Table of Contents

As we continue to acquire and lease real estate assets, we may not be successful in identifying and consummating these transactions.

As of December 31, 2024, we lease 33 of our properties to third-party operators. In the future, we might expand our leasing property portfolio to additional tenants. We have very limited control over the success or failure of our tenants’ and operators’ businesses and, at any time, a tenant or operator may experience a downturn in its business that weakens its financial condition. If that happens, the tenant or operator may fail to make its payments to us when due. Although our lease agreements give us the right to exercise certain remedies in the event of default on the obligations owing to us, we may determine not to do so if we believe that enforcement of our rights would be more detrimental to our business than seeking alternative approaches.

Our execution of this strategy by successfully identifying, securing and consummating beneficial transactions is made more challenging by increased competition and can be affected by many factors, including our relationships with current and prospective tenants, our ability to obtain debt and equity capital at costs comparable to or better than our competitors and our ability to negotiate favorable terms with property owners seeking to sell and other contractual counterparties. Our competitors for these opportunities include healthcare REITs, real estate partnerships, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders and other investors, including developers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, government-sponsored entities and private equity firms, some of whom may have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we do. Potential regulations may affect the ability of these entities, as well as ourselves, to compete for these opportunities or enter into transactions for real estate related to our business. If we are unsuccessful at identifying and capitalizing on investment or acquisition opportunities, our growth and profitability in our real estate investment portfolio may be adversely affected.

Investments in and acquisitions of healthcare properties entail risks associated with real estate investments generally, including risks that the investment will not achieve expected returns, that the cost estimates for necessary property improvements will prove inaccurate or that the tenant or operator will fail to meet performance expectations. Income from properties and yields from investments in our properties may be affected by many factors, including changes in governmental regulation (such as licensing and government payment), general or local economic conditions (such as fluctuations in interest rates, senior savings, and employment conditions), the available local supply of and demand for improved real estate, a reduction in rental income as the result of an inability to maintain occupancy levels, natural disasters (such as hurricanes, earthquakes and floods) or similar factors. Furthermore, healthcare properties are often highly customized, and the development or redevelopment of such properties may require costly tenant-specific improvements. As a result, we cannot assure you that we will achieve the economic benefit we expect from acquisition or investment opportunities.

As we expand our presence in other relevant healthcare industries, we would become subject to risks in a market in which we have limited experience.

The majority of our independent subsidiaries have historically been SNFs. As we expand our presence in other relevant healthcare industries, our existing overall business model will continue to change and expose our company to risks in markets in which we have limited experience, such as the Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act and other state laws that are not as well-developed in regulation and decisional authority as their federal equivalents. We expect that we will have to adjust certain elements of our existing business model, which could have an adverse effect on our business.

If our referral sources fail to view us as an attractive skilled nursing provider, or if our referral sources otherwise refer fewer patients, our patient base may decrease.

We rely significantly on appropriate referrals from hospitals, physicians, and other healthcare providers in the communities in which we deliver our services to attract appropriate residents and patients to our independent subsidiaries. Our referral sources are not obligated to refer business to us and may refer business to other healthcare providers. We believe many of our referral sources refer business to us as a result of the quality of our patient care and our efforts to establish and build a relationship with our referral sources. If we lose, or fail to maintain, existing relationships with our referral resources, fail to develop new relationships, or if we are perceived by our referral sources as not providing high quality patient care, our occupancy rate and the quality of our patient mix could suffer. In addition, if any of our referral sources have a reduction in patients whom they can refer due to a decrease in their business, our occupancy rate and the quality of our patient mix could suffer.

Table of Contents

We may need additional capital to fund our independent subsidiaries and finance our growth, and we may not be able to obtain it on terms acceptable to us, or at all, which may limit our ability to grow.

Our ability to maintain and enhance our independent subsidiaries and equipment in a suitable condition to meet regulatory standards, operate efficiently and remain competitive in our markets requires us to commit substantial resources to continued investment in our independent subsidiaries and equipment. We are sometimes more aggressive than our competitors in capital spending to address issues that arise in connection with aging and obsolete facilities and equipment. In addition, continued expansion of our business through the acquisition of existing facilities, expansion of our existing facilities and construction of new facilities may require additional capital, particularly if we were to accelerate our acquisition and expansion plans. Financing may not be available to us or may be available to us only on terms that are not favorable, including being subject to interest rates that are higher than those incurred in the recent past. In addition, some of our outstanding indebtedness and long-term leases restrict, among other things, our ability to incur additional debt. If we are unable to raise additional funds or obtain additional funds on terms acceptable to us, we may have to delay or abandon some or all of our growth strategies. Further, if additional funds are raised through the issuance of additional equity securities, the percentage ownership of our stockholders would be diluted. Any newly issued equity securities may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of our common stock.

The condition of the financial markets, including volatility and deterioration in the capital and credit markets, could limit the availability of debt and equity financing sources to fund the capital and liquidity requirements of our business, as well as negatively impact or impair the value of our current portfolio of cash, cash equivalents and investments, including U.S. Treasury securities and U.S.-backed investments.

Our cash, cash equivalents and investments are held in a variety of interest-bearing instruments, including U.S. treasury securities. Given that future deterioration in the U.S. and global credit and financial markets is a possibility, no assurance can be made that losses or significant deterioration in the fair value of our cash, cash equivalents, or investments will not occur. Uncertainty surrounding the trading market for U.S. government securities or impairment of the U.S. government's ability to satisfy its obligations under such treasury securities could impact the liquidity or valuation of our current portfolio of cash, cash equivalents, and investments, a substantial portion of which were invested in U.S. treasury securities. Further, continued domestic and international political uncertainty, along with credit, and financial market uncertainty, may make it difficult for us to liquidate our investments prior to their maturity without incurring a loss, which would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

We may need additional capital if a substantial acquisition or other growth opportunity becomes available or if unexpected events occur or opportunities arise. U.S. capital markets can be volatile. We cannot assure you that additional capital will be available or available on terms acceptable to us. If capital is not available, we may not be able to fund internal or external business expansion or respond to competitive pressures or other market conditions.

Delays in reimbursement may cause liquidity problems.

If we experience problems with our billing information systems or if issues arise with Medicare, Medicaid or other payors, we may encounter delays in our payment cycle. From time to time, we have experienced such delays as a result of government payors instituting planned reimbursement delays for budget balancing purposes or as a result of prepayment reviews.

Some states in which we operate are operating with budget deficits or could have budget deficits in the future, which may delay reimbursement in a manner that would adversely affect our liquidity. In addition, from time to time, procedural issues require us to resubmit or appeal claims before payment is remitted, which contributes to our aged receivables. Unanticipated delays in receiving reimbursement from state programs or commercial payors due to changes in their policies or billing or audit procedures may adversely impact our liquidity and working capital.

Table of Contents

The continued use and growth of managed care organizations (MCOs) may contribute to delays or reductions in our reimbursement, including Managed Medicaid.

In forty-one states, including some of the largest where we operate, state Medicaid benefits are administered through MCOs. Typically, these MCOs manage commercial health and federal Medicare Advantage benefits under a managed care contract. Nationally, more than two-thirds of all Medicaid beneficiaries receive most or all of their care from MCOs. MCOs may be more aggressive than state Medicaid and federal Medicare agencies in denying claims or seeking recoupment of payments so that their services under these managed contracts are profitable. The additional steps created by the use of MCOs in disbursement of funds creates more risk of delayed, reduced, or recouped payments for our independent subsidiaries, and additional avenues for risks that include fines and other sanctions, including suspension or exclusion from participation in various governmental programs.

Compliance with the regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development may require us to make unanticipated expenditures which could increase our costs.

Twenty-three of our independent subsidiaries are currently subject to regulatory agreements with HUD that give the Commissioner of HUD broad authority to require us to be replaced as the operator of those facilities in the event that the Commissioner determines there are operational deficiencies at such facilities under HUD regulations. Compliance with HUD's requirements can often be difficult because these requirements are not always consistent with the requirements of other federal and state agencies. Appealing a failed inspection can be costly and time-consuming and, if we do not successfully remediate the failed inspection, we could be precluded from obtaining HUD financing in the future or we may encounter limitations or prohibitions on our operation of HUD-insured facilities.

If we fail to safeguard the monies held in our patient trust funds, we will be required to reimburse such monies, and we may be subject to citations, fines and penalties.

Each of our independent subsidiaries is required by federal law to maintain a patient trust fund to safeguard certain assets of their residents and patients. If any money held in a patient trust fund is misappropriated, we are required to reimburse the patient trust fund for the amount of money that was misappropriated. If any monies held in our patient trust funds are misappropriated in the future and are unrecoverable, we will be required to reimburse such monies, and we may be subject to citations, fines and penalties pursuant to federal and state laws.

We are a holding company with no operations and rely upon our multiple independent subsidiaries to provide us with the funds necessary to meet our financial obligations. Liabilities of any one or more of our subsidiaries could be imposed upon us or our other subsidiaries.

We are a holding company with no direct operating assets, employees or revenue. Each of our independent subsidiaries is operated through a separate, wholly-owned, independent subsidiary, which has its own management, employees and assets. Our principal assets are the equity interests we directly or indirectly hold in our multiple operating and real estate holding subsidiaries. As a result, we are dependent upon distributions from our subsidiaries to generate the funds necessary to meet our financial obligations and pay dividends. Our subsidiaries are legally distinct from us and have no obligation to make funds available to us. The ability of our subsidiaries to make distributions to us will depend substantially on their respective operating results and will be subject to restrictions under, among other things, the laws of their jurisdiction of organization, which may limit the amount of funds available for distribution to investors or stockholders, agreements of those subsidiaries, the terms of our financing arrangements and the terms of any future financing arrangements of our subsidiaries.

Certain directors who serve on our Board of Directors also serve as directors of Pennant, and ownership of shares of Pennant common stock by our directors and executive officers may create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest.

Certain of our directors who serve on our Board of Directors also serve on the board of directors of Pennant. This may create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest when our, or Pennant's management and directors face decisions that could have different implications for us and Pennant, including the resolution of any dispute regarding the terms of the agreements governing the spin-off transaction and the relationship between us and Pennant after the spin-off transaction or any other commercial agreements entered into in the future between us and Pennant and the allocation of such directors’ time between us and Pennant.

All of our executive officers and some of our non-employee directors own shares of the common stock of Pennant. The continued ownership of such common stock by our directors and executive officers following the spin-off creates, or may create, the appearance of a conflict of interest when these directors and executive officers are faced with decisions that could have different implications for us and Pennant.

Table of Contents

If Standard Bearer fails to remain qualified as a REIT, it will be subject to U.S. federal income tax as a regular corporation and could face substantial tax liability.

Standard Bearer currently operates, and intends to continue to operate, in a manner that allows it to qualify to be taxed as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If Standard Bearer fails to remain qualified to be taxed as a REIT in any year, it would be subject to U.S. federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to its shareholders would not be deductible by it in computing its taxable income. Any resulting corporate liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to its shareholders. Unless it was entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, it also would be disqualified from re-electing to be taxed as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which it failed to qualify to be taxed as a REIT.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on Standard Bearer.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury). Changes to the tax laws or interpretations thereof, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect Standard Bearer's investors or Standard Bearer. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws, including any tax reform called for by the current presidential administration, might affect Standard Bearer or its investors. New legislation, Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect its ability to qualify to be taxed as a REIT or the U.S. federal income tax consequences to Standard Bearer or its investors of such qualification. Changes to the U.S. federal tax laws and interpretations thereof, whether under the TCJA or otherwise, could adversely affect an investment in our stock.

No prediction can be made regarding whether new legislation or regulation (including new tax measures) will be enacted by legislative bodies or governmental agencies, nor can we predict what consequences would result from this legislation or regulation. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the currently anticipated tax treatment of an investment will not be modified by legislative, judicial or administrative changes, possibly with retroactive effect.

Under applicable provisions of the Code, Standard Bearer will not be treated as a REIT unless it satisfies various requirements, including requirements relating to the sources of its gross income. Rents received or accrued by it from its tenants will not be treated as qualifying rent for purposes of these requirements if the leases are not respected as true leases for U.S. federal income tax purposes and are instead treated as service contracts, joint ventures or other arrangements. If the leases are not respected as true leases for U.S. federal income tax purposes, Standard Bearer will likely fail to qualify to be taxed as a REIT.

Even if Standard Bearer remains qualified as a REIT, it may face other tax liabilities that reduce its cash flow.

Even if Standard Bearer remain qualified for taxation as a REIT, it may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state, and local taxes on its income and assets, including taxes on any undistributed income and state or local income, property and transfer taxes. For example, Standard Bearer may hold some of its assets or conduct certain of its activities through one or more taxable REIT subsidiaries (each, a TRS) or other subsidiary corporations that will be subject to U.S. federal, state, and local corporate-level income taxes as regular C corporations. In addition, it may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with a TRS if they are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distribution to its shareholders.

Failure to comply with existing environmental laws could result in increased expenditures, litigation and potential loss to our business and in our asset value.

Our independent subsidiaries are subject to regulations under various federal, state and local environmental laws, primarily those relating to the handling, storage, transportation, treatment and disposal of medical waste; the identification and warning of the presence of asbestos-containing materials in buildings, as well as the encapsulation or removal of such materials; and the presence of other substances in the indoor environment.

Table of Contents

Our independent subsidiaries generate infectious or other hazardous medical waste due to the illness or physical condition of the patients. Each of our independent subsidiaries has an agreement with a waste management company for the proper disposal of all infectious medical waste, but the use of a waste management company does not immunize us from alleged violations of such laws even if carried out by a third party, nor does it immunize us from third-party claims for the cost to cleanup disposal sites at which such wastes have been disposed.

Some of the independently operated facilities we lease, own or may acquire may have asbestos-containing materials. Federal regulations require building owners and those exercising control over a building's management to identify and warn their employees and other employers operating in the building of potential hazards posed by workplace exposure to installed asbestos-containing materials and known or suspected asbestos-containing materials in their buildings. Significant fines can be assessed for violation of these regulations. Building owners and those exercising control over a building's management may be subject to an increased risk of personal injury lawsuits. Federal, state and local laws and regulations also govern the removal, encapsulation, disturbance, handling and disposal of asbestos-containing materials and potential asbestos-containing materials when such materials are in poor condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a building. Such laws may impose liability for improper handling or a release into the environment of asbestos containing materials and potential asbestos-containing materials and may provide for fines to, and for third parties to seek recovery from, owners or operators of real properties for personal injury or improper work exposure associated with asbestos-containing materials and potential asbestos-containing materials.

The presence of mold, lead-based paint, underground storage tanks, contaminants in drinking water, radon and/or other substances at our independent subsidiaries may lead to the incurrence of costs for remediation, mitigation or the implementation of an operations and maintenance plan and may result in third party litigation for personal injury or property damage.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock

We may not be able to pay or maintain dividends and the failure to do so would adversely affect our stock price.

Our ability to pay and maintain cash dividends is based on many factors, including our ability to make and finance acquisitions, our ability to negotiate favorable lease and other contractual terms, anticipated operating cost levels, the level of demand for occupancy at our facilities, the rates we charge and actual results that may vary substantially from estimates. Some of the factors are beyond our control and a change in any such factor could affect our ability to pay or maintain dividends. The Credit Facility restricts our ability to pay dividends to stockholders if we receive notice that we are in default under the agreement. The failure to pay or maintain dividends could adversely affect our stock price.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law contain provisions that could discourage transactions resulting in a change in control, which may negatively affect the market price of our common stock.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that may enable our Board of Directors to resist a change in control. These provisions may discourage, delay or prevent a change in the ownership of our company or a change in our management, even if doing so might be beneficial to our stockholders. In addition, these provisions could limit the price that investors would be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock. Such provisions set forth in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws include:

•our Board of Directors is authorized, without prior stockholder approval, to create and issue preferred stock, commonly referred to as “blank check” preferred stock, with rights senior to those of common stock;

•advance notice requirements for stockholders to nominate individuals to serve on our Board of Directors or to submit proposals that can be acted upon at stockholder meetings;

•our Board of Directors is classified so not all members of our board are elected at one time, which may make it more difficult for a person who acquires control of a majority of our outstanding voting stock to replace our directors;

•stockholder action by written consent is limited;

•special meetings of the stockholders are permitted to be called only by the chairman of our Board of Directors, our chief executive officer or by a majority of our Board of Directors;

•stockholders are not permitted to cumulate their votes for the election of directors;

Table of Contents

•newly created directorships resulting from an increase in the authorized number of directors or vacancies on our Board of Directors are filled only by majority vote of the remaining directors;

•our Board of Directors is expressly authorized to make, alter or repeal our bylaws; and

•stockholders are permitted to amend our bylaws only upon receiving the affirmative vote of at least a majority of our outstanding common stock.

Under these provisions, if anyone becomes an “interested stockholder,” we may not enter into a “business combination” with that person for three years without special approval, which could discourage a third-party from making a takeover offer and could delay or prevent a change of control. For purposes of Section 203, “interested stockholder” means, generally, someone owning more than 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock or an affiliate of ours that owned 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock during the past three years, subject to certain exceptions as described in Section 203.

These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law could discourage acquisition proposals and make it more difficult or expensive for stockholders or potential acquirers to obtain control of our Board of Directors or initiate actions that are opposed by our then-current Board of Directors, including delaying or impeding a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving us. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our Board of Directors could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

Item 1C. CYBERSECURITY

We utilize information technology that enables our operational leaders to access and share with their peers, both clinical and financial performance data in real time. Armed with relevant and current information, our operation leaders and their management teams can share best practices and the latest information, adjust to challenges and opportunities on a timely basis, improve quality of care, mitigate risk and improve both clinical outcomes and financial performance. We have also invested in specialized healthcare technology systems to assist our nursing and support staff. We have installed software and touch-screen interface systems in each operation to enable our clinical staff to monitor and deliver patient care and record patient information more efficiently. We believe these systems have improved the quality of our medical and billing records, while improving the productivity of our staff. Such uses of information systems give rise to cybersecurity risks, including system disruption, security breach, ransomware, theft, espionage and inadvertent release of information.

RISK MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGY

Risk Management

We assess and identify security risk to the organization by:

•conducting risk assessments to determine the likelihood and magnitude of an attack from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification or destruction of information systems and the related information processes, stored, or transmitted;

•performing penetration testing assessments annually and producing security assessment reports that document the results of the assessment for use and review by information technology (IT) senior leadership, including the Service Center's Chief Information Officer;

•ensuring security controls are assessed for effectiveness, are implemented correctly, operating as intended and producing the desired outcome;

•continuously scanning for vulnerabilities and remediating vulnerabilities within their service level agreements in accordance with the associated risk level; and

•reviewing third party and vendor risks to our organization through an internal interdisciplinary Technology Advisory Committee that includes members from our IT, Information Security Office (ISO), legal, compliance, clinical, finance and billing departments.

Table of Contents

Monitoring

We have established a continuous monitoring strategy and program, which includes:

•a set of defined security metrics to be monitored;

•performance of security control assessments on an ongoing basis;

•addressing results of analysis and reporting security status to the executive team;

•monitoring information systems to detect attacks and indicators of potential attacks or compromises;

•identification of unauthorized use of the information system resources;

•deployment of monitoring systems and agents strategically within the information system environment; and

•require that third party service providers who store, process or transmit data with access to electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI) undergo an independent third-party audit to achieve system organization controls certification annually.

Data Protection

We have implemented an Information Security Management System Program to secure sensitive data protected by us. This program includes:

•establishing policies governing data security;

•monitoring data access throughout the organization’s independent subsidiaries;

•providing continuous security training and awareness;

•establishing controls over devices on the network which are actively tracked, monitored and evaluated for new, missing, or updated software needed to strengthen security on the device, patch known vulnerabilities, or stabilize software or operating system issues;

•protecting sensitive data through encryption techniques; and

•designing and implementing systems to include backup and recoverability principles, such as periodic data backups and safeguards in the case of a disaster.

Incident Management Plan

Our cybersecurity incident management plan comprises the following six-step process:

•The Service Center's Chief Information Officer and Director of Information Security lead its ISO team in the development, documentation, review and testing of security procedures and incident management procedures. Beyond initial creation, procedures are continually re-assessed, updated and tested on an ongoing basis.

•The ISO team works with the Executive Team on the identification, assessment, verification and classification of incidents to determine affected stakeholders and appropriate parties for contact.

•The Service Center's Chief Information Officer and Director of Information Security are responsible for launching the Incident Response Team (IRT) if necessary and for notification to the Executive Team, who in turn will contact the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee to validate that the response is being addressed appropriately.

•The IRT, in consultation with outside experts if needed, is responsible for the following:

•Initial containment by making tactical changes to the computing environment to mitigate active threats based on currently known information.

•Analysis to establish the root cause of incidents, identification and evidence collection from all affected machines and log sources, threat intelligence and other information sources. Once all appropriate information has been collected, we perform a careful analysis using forensically-sound tools and methods to prevent any contamination of evidence.

•Incident containment by further analyzing additional information and further identifying any additional compromised machines or resources not previously identified.

•Incident eradication by re-assessing the root cause of incidents where solutions are then implemented to solve underlying problems and prevent re-occurrence.

•Recovery and restoring normal business functionality, which includes the reversal of any damage caused by the incident and responding as necessary.

Table of Contents

•Review after closure of each incident and conducting a lessons learned analysis to improve prevention and help to make incident response processes more efficient and effective. Also, the IRT evaluates competency and any additional training requirements needed. A final incident report will then be provided to key stakeholders and IRT members, which includes, but is not limited to the summary of the incident and its impact, a timeline of events, a detailed description of the incident, an evaluation of the organizational response and an assessment of the damages.

We have not experienced a material cybersecurity breach in the past five years and, as a result, there have been no charges related to a breach in the past five years. Risk Factors.

GOVERNANCE

Our Audit Committee receives quarterly reports on our information security and cyber fraud prevention programs from the Service Center's Chief Information Officer and Director of Information Security, who each have over 24 years of experience in IT, including various leadership roles at other large corporations. One of the three members of our Audit Committee is a cybersecurity expert.

The ISO has been established by the Service Center's Chief Information Officer, with dedicated cyber security staff focusing on security monitoring, vulnerability management, incident response, risk assessments, employee training, security engineering and management of cyber security policies, standards and regulatory compliance. Like many organizations, we align to a Cyber Security Framework and take a risk-based approach during control assessment and implementation. We align to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4, a globally recognized cyber security framework of Policies, Standards and Controls is comprised of five categories of defense – Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond and Recover. We are committed to the protection of our data, systems, network and continually invest in enhancements to mitigate or reduce the impact from a cyber security threat. We conduct periodic tests to maintain readiness and resiliency while regularly reviewing policies in the interest of protecting data security. External companies or agencies may be called upon to provide consulting, guidance, assistance, or some other form of support in response to a cybersecurity incident. The regular training of employees, at least annually, on the ever-present threat of cybersecurity helps maintain data security.

Recently Filed

Click on a ticker to see risk factors

Ticker *	File Date
NRHI	1 day, 2 hours ago
QDMI	1 day, 15 hours ago
PETV	1 day, 15 hours ago
ECIA	1 day, 15 hours ago
CAG	1 day, 15 hours ago
KALV	1 day, 16 hours ago
AIHS	1 day, 16 hours ago
MEI	2 days, 15 hours ago
AIDG	2 days, 19 hours ago
AVAI	3 days, 15 hours ago
ORIB	3 days, 20 hours ago
ADTI	1 week, 1 day ago
BUKS	1 week, 1 day ago
MFBI	1 week, 1 day ago
HGYN	1 week, 1 day ago
PODC	1 week, 2 days ago
AAQL	1 week, 2 days ago
FIZZ	1 week, 2 days ago
KEQU	1 week, 2 days ago
AERT	1 week, 2 days ago
CRDO	1 week, 3 days ago
MSBI	1 week, 3 days ago
NCL	1 week, 4 days ago
QLGN	1 week, 4 days ago
CNVS	1 week, 4 days ago
PMNT	1 week, 4 days ago
STEK	1 week, 4 days ago
PTCO	1 week, 4 days ago
FATN	1 week, 4 days ago
ZCAR	1 week, 4 days ago
SUND	1 week, 4 days ago
ELTP	1 week, 4 days ago
RGPX	1 week, 4 days ago
ELRE	1 week, 4 days ago
PCSV	1 week, 4 days ago
ATXG	1 week, 5 days ago
EZBC	1 week, 5 days ago
EZET	1 week, 5 days ago
FGDL	1 week, 5 days ago
OMCC	2 weeks ago
MXC	2 weeks ago
AIRT	2 weeks ago
IGC	2 weeks ago
MSN	2 weeks ago
KFY	2 weeks ago
GENC	2 weeks ago
XITO	2 weeks ago
CGEH	2 weeks, 1 day ago
ETST	2 weeks, 1 day ago
STRZ	2 weeks, 1 day ago

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Dashboard

Corporate Flights

Dashboard

App Ratings

Dashboard

Strategies

Alerts

Browse Data

Risk Factors Dashboard

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - ENSG

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Recently Filed

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Corporate Flights

App Ratings

TRADE SMARTER

TRADE SMARTER

Strategies

Alerts

Browse Data

Risk Factors Dashboard

View risk factors by ticker

Search filings by term

Risk Factors - ENSG

-New additions in green-Changes in blue-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing

Recently Filed

OTHER DATASETS

House Trading

Corporate Flights

App Ratings

TRADE SMARTER

TRADE SMARTER

-New additions in green
-Changes in blue
-Hover to see similar sentence in last filing