e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 001-32641
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
20-3068069 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
330 North Wabash, Suite 1400, Chicago, Illinois 60611
(Address of principal executive offices)
Telephone: (312) 977-3700
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No o
Indicate by a check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer,
or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer þ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As of May 10, 2006, 65,006,833 shares of the Registrants common stock, $0.01 par value, were
outstanding.
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except stock amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
94,096 |
|
|
$ |
77,682 |
|
Cash and investments restricted |
|
|
41,984 |
|
|
|
37,314 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
12,160 |
|
|
|
10,623 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other, net |
|
|
33,239 |
|
|
|
20,258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
181,479 |
|
|
|
145,877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
1,715,239 |
|
|
|
1,479,587 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(104,688 |
) |
|
|
(70,855 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
1,610,551 |
|
|
|
1,408,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and investments restricted |
|
|
7,565 |
|
|
|
24,099 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
65,646 |
|
|
|
65,646 |
|
Lease security deposits |
|
|
19,723 |
|
|
|
25,271 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
40,107 |
|
|
|
28,186 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,925,071 |
|
|
$ |
1,697,811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of debt |
|
$ |
10,766 |
|
|
$ |
132 |
|
Line of credit |
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
|
4,290 |
|
|
|
9,253 |
|
Accrued expenses |
|
|
85,574 |
|
|
|
85,392 |
|
Refundable entrance fees |
|
|
31,606 |
|
|
|
30,693 |
|
Tenant refundable fees and security deposits |
|
|
17,087 |
|
|
|
16,333 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
20,849 |
|
|
|
13,093 |
|
Dividends payable |
|
|
23,167 |
|
|
|
16,547 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
280,339 |
|
|
|
171,443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion |
|
|
887,074 |
|
|
|
754,169 |
|
Deferred gains |
|
|
59,594 |
|
|
|
60,681 |
|
Deferred lease liability |
|
|
24,493 |
|
|
|
19,234 |
|
Deferred tax liability |
|
|
41,689 |
|
|
|
41,689 |
|
Other |
|
|
20,681 |
|
|
|
20,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,313,870 |
|
|
|
1,067,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests |
|
|
12,267 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $.01 par value, 50,000,000
shares authorized at March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005; no shares issued and
outstanding, respectively |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value,
200,000,000 shares authorized at March 31,
2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively;
65,006,833 shares issued and outstanding,
respectively |
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
Additional paid-in-capital |
|
|
670,801 |
|
|
|
690,950 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(81,952 |
) |
|
|
(62,626 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
9,435 |
|
|
|
1,429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
598,934 |
|
|
|
630,403 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,925,071 |
|
|
$ |
1,697,811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated and combined financial statements.
3
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
COMBINED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited, in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale |
|
|
|
Brookdale |
|
|
Facility Group |
|
|
|
Senior Living |
|
|
(Predecessor |
|
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
Company) |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resident fees |
|
$ |
221,036 |
|
|
$ |
174,112 |
|
Management fees |
|
|
1,147 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
|
222,183 |
|
|
|
174,983 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility operating (excluding depreciation and amortization of $21,410 and $3,540, respectively) |
|
|
136,945 |
|
|
|
110,349 |
|
General and administrative (including non-cash stock compensation expense of $3,018 for 2006) |
|
|
21,085 |
|
|
|
11,658 |
|
Facility lease expense |
|
|
45,734 |
|
|
|
46,502 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
22,299 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
226,063 |
|
|
|
173,682 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(3,880 |
) |
|
|
1,301 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
(13,690 |
) |
|
|
(9,125 |
) |
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
(423 |
) |
Change in fair value of derivatives |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
4,062 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
|
|
(1,334 |
) |
|
|
(453 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated ventures |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(18,824 |
) |
|
|
(4,129 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
(386 |
) |
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before minority interest |
|
|
(19,210 |
) |
|
|
(4,295 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
2,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before discontinued operations |
|
|
(19,326 |
) |
|
|
(1,763 |
) |
Loss on discontinued operations, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,798 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share |
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing basic and diluted loss per share |
|
|
65,007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated and combined financial statements.
4
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
COMBINED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited, in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale |
|
|
|
Brookdale |
|
|
Facility Group |
|
|
|
Senior Living |
|
|
(Predecessor |
|
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
Company) |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,798 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
|
|
1,334 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
23,002 |
|
|
|
5,596 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
(2,532 |
) |
Equity in loss of unconsolidated ventures |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
Loss on discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Amortization of deferred gain |
|
|
(1,087 |
) |
|
|
(2,296 |
) |
Amortization of entrance fees |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from deferred entrance fee revenue |
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes provision |
|
|
|
|
|
|
166 |
|
Change in deferred lease liability |
|
|
5,259 |
|
|
|
6,094 |
|
Change in fair value of derivatives |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
(4,062 |
) |
Compensation expenses related to restricted stock grants |
|
|
3,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
(1,446 |
) |
|
|
999 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets, net |
|
|
827 |
|
|
|
3,202 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
(5,104 |
) |
|
|
(10,383 |
) |
Tenant refundable fees and security deposits |
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
Other |
|
|
4,290 |
|
|
|
(352 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
12,119 |
|
|
|
(4,428 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease (increase) in lease security deposits and lease acquisition deposits, net |
|
$ |
5,548 |
|
|
$ |
(67 |
) |
Decrease in cash and investments restricted |
|
|
13,069 |
|
|
|
3,292 |
|
Net proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
677 |
|
Additions to property, plant and equipment, net of related payables |
|
|
(6,737 |
) |
|
|
(5,660 |
) |
Acquisition of assets, net of related payables |
|
|
(197,863 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(185,983 |
) |
|
|
(1,758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from debt |
|
|
127,847 |
|
|
|
192,000 |
|
Proceeds from line of credit |
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of debt |
|
|
(3,934 |
) |
|
|
(179,762 |
) |
Payment of dividends |
|
|
(16,547 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Payment of financing costs, net of related payables |
|
|
(5,006 |
) |
|
|
(2,762 |
) |
Refundable entrance fees: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from refundable entrance fees |
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
Refunds of entrance fees |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Payment of swap termination |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,065 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
190,278 |
|
|
|
(4,589 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
16,414 |
|
|
|
(10,775 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
77,682 |
|
|
|
86,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
94,096 |
|
|
$ |
76,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
COMBINED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
(Unaudited, in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Facility |
|
|
|
Brookdale |
|
|
Group |
|
|
|
Senior Living |
|
|
(Predecessor |
|
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
Company) |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid |
|
$ |
13,358 |
|
|
$ |
10,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid |
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
$ |
1,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-off of fully amortized intangible asset |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-off of deferred costs |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Schedule of Non-cash Operating, Investing and Financing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidation of limited partnerships pursuant to EITF 04-5 on January 1, 2006: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
31,645 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other |
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and investments-restricted |
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other asset |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued expenses |
|
|
(906 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(1,290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Tenant refundable fees and security deposits |
|
|
(177 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
(19,723 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
(12,114 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated and combined financial statements.
6
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
1. Organization
Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (BSL) was formed as a Delaware corporation on June 28, 2005.
Under the Certificate of Incorporation, the Company was initially authorized to issue up to 5,000
common shares and 5,000 preferred shares. On September 30, 2005,
our Certificate of Incorporation
was amended and restated to authorize up to 200,000 common shares and 50,000 preferred shares. We
provide services to the elderly through facilities located in urban and suburban areas of major
markets in the United States.
On September 30, 2005, the holders of all equity shares or membership interests in Brookdale
Living Communities, Inc. (BLC), Alterra Healthcare Corporation (Alterra), FIT REN LLC (FIT
REN) and Fortress CCRC Acquisition LLC (Fortress CCRC) (collectively all such entities are
referred to as the Brookdale Facility Group) contributed their ownership interests to BSL for
common shares of BSL. Simultaneously with the formation transaction, FIT II, as defined below,
contributed its membership interest in FIT REN to FEBC, as defined below, in exchange for common
shares of BSL. A summary of the common shares issued by BSL for the respective interests is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BLC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
Alterra |
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
FIT REN |
|
|
11,750 |
|
|
|
29,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fortress CCRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We completed our initial public offering of common shares on November 22, 2005.
Prior to the formation transaction described above, Fortress Investment Group (FIG)
controlled BLC, Alterra, FIT REN and Fortress CCRC through its ability to exercise voting,
financial and investment control over each of the entities through contractual control
relationships with and investment advisory agreements over the various entities that own the
majority of BLC, Alterra, FIT REN and Fortress CCRC.
Ownership interests in BLC and Alterra representing all interests in the formation transaction
not controlled by FIG (Non-FIG Shareholders, which owned approximately 10.1 million and 4.8
million shares of BLC and Alterra, respectively, collectively 14.9 million of the above shares of
common stock representing 50.5% and 26.7% of BLC and Alterra, respectively, collectively 25.7% of
the shares outstanding in BSL) were adjusted for financial reporting purposes to the fair value as
if their ownership interests in BLC and Alterra were purchased by BSL as of September 30, 2005.
This results in partial step-up to the fair value in the assets, liabilities and equity of BSL.
The combined 2005 financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2005 include the
accounts of BLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fortress Brookdale Acquisition LLC (FBA) and
Alterra, a wholly-owned subsidiary of FEBC ALT Investors LLC FEBC. All entities were indirectly
controlled by affiliates of FIG and as such are presented on a combined basis due to their common
control.
These combined statements are presented on a combined basis due to that fact that FIG
controlled each of BLC and Alterra through its voting, financial and investment control over
Fortress Registered Investment Trust (FRIT) and FIT II.
FIG exercises control over FRIT and FIT II through contractual control relationships with, and
investment advisory control over, each of FRIT and FIT II. FRIT and FIT II are wholly-owned
subsidiaries of Fortress Investment Fund (FIF) and Fortress Investment Fund II (FIF II),
respectively. As FIG controlled more than 50 percent of the
voting ownership interest of BLC and Alterra, pursuant to EITF Opinion No. 02-5, Definition of
Common Control in relation to FASB Statement No. 141, the Company is presenting combined
financial statements.
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
7
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
The accompanying condensed consolidated and combined financial statements are unaudited and
include all normal recurring adjustments, which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a
fair presentation of the results for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 pursuant
to the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Certain information and
footnote disclosures normally included in the financial statements prepared in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and
regulations. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated and
combined financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005. Operating results are not necessarily indicative of
results that may be expected for the entire year ended December 31, 2006.
Principles of Consolidation
In December 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued a revised
Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an interpretation of ARB No. 51
(FIN 46R). This Interpretation addresses the consolidation by business enterprises of primary
beneficiaries in variable interest entities (VIE) as defined in the Interpretation. A company
that holds variable interests in an entity will need to consolidate the entity if its interest in
the VIE is such that it will absorb a majority of the VIEs losses and/or receive a majority of
expected residual returns, if they occur.
On March 1, 2005 and December 30, 2005, we obtained legal title to four VIEs (The Meadows of
Glen Ellyn, The Heritage of Raleigh, Trillium Place and The Hallmark of Creve Coeur facilities) and
one VIE (the Hallmark of Battery Park City), respectively. The five VIEs were previously
consolidated pursuant to FIN 46R and accordingly the legal acquisition of the facilities had
minimal accounting impact.
The financial statements of Brookdale Facility Group (Predecessor Company) are presented on a
combined basis, in accordance with GAAP for the period January 1, 2005 through March 31, 2005. For
financial reporting purposes the non-controlling shareholders or members (ownership interests other
than those controlled by FIG) have been presented as minority interest. Upon consummation of the
formation transaction, the minority interests were consolidated as shareholders of BSL and their
interest reflected at fair value in accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations.
All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Investment in Unconsolidated Ventures
The equity method of accounting has been applied in the accompanying financial statements with
respect to our investment in unconsolidated ventures that are not considered VIEs as we do not
possess a controlling financial interest.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2005, the FASB issued EITF Issue No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or
the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited
Partners Have Certain Rights (EITF 04-5). EITF 04-5 provides guidance in determining whether a
general partner controls a limited partnership that is not a VIE and thus should consolidate the
limited partnership. The effective date is June 29, 2005, for all new limited partnerships and
existing limited partnerships for which the partnership agreements are modified and no later than
the beginning of the first reporting period in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005 for
all other limited partnerships. We adopted EITF 04-05 effective January 1, 2006, and as a result,
consolidated the operations of three limited partnerships controlled by us. A summary of
the impact on the financial position of the Company as of January 1, 2006 is presented in the
Supplemental Schedule of Non-cash Operating, Investing and Financing Activities.
Use of Estimates
8
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported and disclosures of
contingent assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet and accompanying notes. Actual
results could differ from those estimates and assumptions.
Revenue Recognition
Resident Fee Revenue
Resident fee revenue is recorded when services are rendered and consists of fees for basic
housing, support services and fees associated with additional services such as personalized health
and assisted living care. Residency agreements are generally for a term of 30 days to one year.
Entrance Fees
The non-refundable portion of the entrance fee is recorded as deferred revenue and amortized
over the estimated stay of the resident based on an actuarial valuation. The refundable portion is
generally refundable upon the sale of the unit, or in certain agreements upon the resale of a
comparable unit or 12 months after the resident vacates the unit. All refundable amounts due to
residents are classified as current liabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refundable |
|
|
Nonrefundable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
(Deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Revenue) |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance at December 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
30,693 |
|
|
$ |
1,156 |
|
|
$ |
31,849 |
|
Additions |
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
2,069 |
|
Amortization |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
) |
Refunds |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
31,606 |
|
|
$ |
1,526 |
|
|
$ |
33,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Income
SFAS No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive Income, establishes guidelines for the reporting and
display of comprehensive income and its components in financial statements. Comprehensive income
includes net income and all other non-owner changes in shareholders equity during a period
including unrealized gains and losses on equity securities classified as available-for-sale and
unrealized fair value adjustments on certain derivative instruments net of any related income tax
effect. Comprehensive loss for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 equals $11.4 million
and $2.2 million, respectively.
Earnings Per Share
The
Company computes earnings per share in accordance with SFAS No. 128, Earnings Per Share.
SFAS No. 128 requires companies to compute net income per share under two different methods, basic
and diluted, and present per share data for all periods in which statements of operations are
presented. Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income/(net loss) by the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Diluted earnings per share are computed by
dividing net income/(net loss) by the weighted average number of common stock and common stock equivalents
outstanding. Common stock equivalents consist of restricted stock
grants and are included in diluted earnings per share applying the treasury
stock method. Restricted stock grants are excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per
share as their effect is anti-dilutive. The weighted average common stock grants excluded from the
calculations of diluted net loss per share were 2.1 million for the three months ended March 31,
2006.
The following table provides a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators used in
calculating basic and diluted earnings per share for Brookdale Senior Living Inc. for the three
months ended March 31, 2006:
9
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
|
65,007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share |
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
|
|
|
We have excluded the earnings (loss) per share data for the three months ended March 31, 2005.
We believe these calculations are not meaningful to investors due to the different ownership and
legal structures (e.g., corporation and limited liability companies) of the various entities prior
to the combination transaction on September 30, 2005.
Restructuring Charges
SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities, addresses the
accounting and reporting for costs associated with restructuring costs in the financial statements.
In connection with the formation, certain home office functions are being combined and we expect
to incur costs of $1.3 million from January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006. For the three months
ended March 31, 2006, $0.8 million was expensed and included in general and administrative expense.
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at January 1, 2006 |
|
$ |
|
|
Restructuring charges, net |
|
|
766 |
|
Payments |
|
|
(190 |
) |
Reversals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
576 |
|
|
|
|
|
Facility Leases
A summary of facility lease expense and the impact of straight-line adjustment and
amortization of deferred gains for the three months ended March 31 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Facility |
|
|
|
Brookdale Senior |
|
|
Group |
|
|
|
Living Inc. |
|
|
(Predecessor Company) |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Cash basis payment |
|
$ |
41,562 |
|
|
$ |
42,704 |
|
Straight-line expense |
|
|
5,259 |
|
|
|
6,094 |
|
Amortization of deferred gain |
|
|
(1,087 |
) |
|
|
(2,296 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility lease expense |
|
$ |
45,734 |
|
|
$ |
46,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Taxes
During the three months ended March 31, 2006, we incurred a taxable loss which generated
additional net operating losses and in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes,
we established a valuation allowance equal to the net operating loss carryforward due to the
uncertainty of future realization. The current provision reflects the Companys estimated state
tax liability.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation. Expenditures
for ordinary maintenance and repairs are expensed to operations as incurred. Renovations and
improvements, which improve and/or extend the useful life of the asset are capitalized and
depreciated over their estimated useful life, or if the renovations or improvements are made with
respect to facilities subject to an operating lease, over the shorter of the estimated useful life
of the renovations or improvements, or the term of the operating lease. Facility operating expenses
excludes depreciation and amortization directly attributable to the operation of the facility.
In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets and Long-Lived Assets to Be Disposed, we will record impairment losses on long-lived assets
used in operations when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the
undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets during the expected hold period
are less than the carrying amounts of those assets. Impairment losses will be measured as the
difference between carrying value and fair value of assets.
We allocate the purchase price of facilities to net tangible and identified intangible assets
acquired based on their fair values in accordance with the provisions SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations. In making estimates of the fair values of the tangible and intangible assets for
purposes of allocating purchase price, we consider information obtained about each property as a
result of its pre-acquisition due diligence, marketing, leasing activities and independent
appraisals.
We allocate a portion of the purchase price to the value of leases acquired based on the
difference between the facilities valued with existing in-place leases adjusted to market rental
rates and the property valued as if vacant. Factors management considers in its analysis include an
estimate of carrying costs during the expected lease-up periods considering current market
conditions and costs to execute similar leases. In estimating carrying costs, management includes
estimates of lost rentals during the lease-up period and estimated costs to execute similar leases.
The value of in-place leases is amortized to expense over the remaining initial term of the
respective leases.
Depreciation is provided on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of assets,
which are as follows:
|
|
|
Asset Category |
|
Estimated Useful Life |
Buildings and improvements
|
|
40 years |
Leasehold intangibles and improvements
|
|
1 18 years |
Furniture and equipment
|
|
3 7 years |
Resident lease intangibles
|
|
1 2 years |
Dividends
On March 14, 2006, our board of directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.35 per
share of our common stock, or an aggregate of $23.2 million, for the quarter ended March 31, 2006.
The $0.35 per share dividend was paid on April 14, 2006, to holders of record of our common stock
on March 31, 2006.
We intend to continue to pay regular quarterly dividends to the holders of our common stock.
However, our ability to pay and maintain cash dividends is based on many factors, including our
ability to make and
10
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
finance acquisitions, our ability to negotiate favorable lease and other contractual terms,
anticipated operating expense levels, the level of demand for our units/beds, 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. We
can give no assurance as to our ability to pay or maintain dividends. We also cannot assure you
that the level of dividends will be maintained or increase over time or that increases in demand
for our units/beds and monthly resident fees will increase our actual cash available for dividends
to stockholders. We expect that in certain quarters we may pay dividends that exceed our net
income amount for such period as calculated in accordance with GAAP. The failure to pay or
maintain dividends could adversely affect our stock price.
Reclassifications
Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current financial
statement presentation, with no effect on our consolidated financial position or results of
operations.
3. Debt
Line of Credit Agreement
On February 10, 2006, we entered into a $330.0 million credit agreement, consisting of a
$250.0 million term loan available for acquisitions, $20.0 million revolving loan, and a $60.0
million letters of credit commitment. Concurrent with the new credit agreement we terminated our
existing line of credit. The credit agreement bears interest at either prime plus 0.50% or LIBOR
plus 1.50%, at our election, and matures on February 10, 2007, subject to extension at our option
for six months. In connection with the revolving loan we paid a commitment fee of 0.50% and are
subject to a non-use fee on the term loan of 0.125% of the average daily amount of undrawn funds so
long as we draw less than $150.0 million, 0.25% if we draw $150.0 million or more.
As of March 31, 2006, $87.0 million was drawn on the term loan to fund a portion of the
purchase price for several of our acquisitions (notes 6 and 8) and $56.0 of letters of credit have
been issued. Through
May 10, 2006, we have drawn an additional $65.0 million and
$15.0 million on the term loan and revolving loan, respectively.
Long-term Debt, Capital Leases and Financing Obligations
Long-term debt, capital leases and financing obligations consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Mortgage notes payable due 2008 through
2012 weighted average interest at rates of
6.5% (weighted average interest rate 5.55% in
2005) |
|
$ |
196,935 |
|
|
$ |
70,422 |
|
Mortgage
notes payable, due from 2006 through
2037; weighted average interest rate of 9.12%
(weighted average interest rate of 9.12% in
2005) |
|
|
74,588 |
|
|
|
74,704 |
|
$150,000 Series A and $32,000 Series B
(repaid in November 2005 using a portion of
the proceeds from our initial public
offering) notes payable, secured by five
facilities, bearing interest at LIBOR plus
3.05%, payable in monthly installments of
interest only, with a maturity date of April 1, 2008
and 50% guaranteed by BLC |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
Mortgage notes payable due 2012, weighted average
interest rate of 5.38%, payable interest only
through June 2010 and payable in monthly
installments of principal and interest
through maturity in June 2012, secured by the
Prudential Portfolio |
|
|
171,000 |
|
|
|
171,000 |
|
Mortgage notes payable due 2010, bearing interest
of LIBOR plus 3%, payable in monthly
installments of interest only until April
2009 and payable in monthly installments of
principal and interest through maturity in
April 2010, secured by the Fortress CCRC
Portfolio |
|
|
105,756 |
|
|
|
105,756 |
|
Variable rate tax-exempt bonds
credit-enhanced by Fannie Mae, due 2032
secured by the Chambrel Portfolio, payable
interest only until maturity |
|
|
100,841 |
|
|
|
100,841 |
|
Capital and financing lease obligation
payable through 2020; weighted average
interest rate of 11.83% in 2005 (weighted
average interest rate of 11.48%) |
|
|
66,284 |
|
|
|
66,284 |
|
11
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Mezzanine loan payable to Brookdale Senior
Housing, LLC joint venture with respect to The
Heritage at Gaines Ranch facility, payable to
the extent of all available cash flow (as
defined) |
|
|
12,739 |
|
|
|
12,739 |
|
Serial and term revenue bonds repaid January 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,555 |
|
Mortgage notes payables due 2006-2010, weighted
average interest rates of 7.9%, secured by the
limited partnerships consolidated pursuant to
EITF 04-5 ($10,745 payable currently) |
|
|
19,697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt |
|
|
897,840 |
|
|
|
754,301 |
|
Less current portion |
|
|
10,766 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
$ |
887,074 |
|
|
$ |
754,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Litigation
In connection with the sale of certain facilities to Ventas Realty Limited Partnership (Ventas)
in 2004, two legal actions have been filed. The first action was filed on September 15, 2005, by
current and former limited partners in 36 investing partnerships in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York captioned David T. Atkins et. al. v. Apollo Real Estate
Advisors, L.P., et al (the Action). On March 17, 2006, a third amended complaint was filed in the
Action. The third amended complaint is brought on behalf of current and former limited partners in
14 investing partnerships. It names as defendants, among others, the Company, BLC, a subsidiary of
the Company, GFB-AS Investors, LLC (GFB-AS), a subsidiary of BLC, the general partners of the 14
investing partnerships, which are alleged to be subsidiaries of GFB-AS, FIG, an affiliate of our
largest stockholder, and our Chief Financial Officer. The nine count third amended complaint
alleges, among other things, (i) that the defendants converted for their own use the property of
the limited partners of 11 partnerships, including through the failure to obtain consents the
plaintiffs contend were required for the sale of facilities indirectly owned by those partnerships
to Ventas; (ii) that the defendants fraudulently persuaded the limited partners of three
partnerships to give up a valuable property right based upon incomplete, false and misleading
statements in connection with certain consent solicitations; (iii) that certain defendants,
including GFB-AS, the general partners, and our Chief Financial Officer, but not including the
Company, BLC, or FIG, committed mail fraud in connection with the sale of facilities indirectly
owned by the 14 partnerships at issue in the Action to Ventas; (iv) that certain defendants,
including GFB-AS and our Chief Financial Officer, but not including the Company, BLC, the general
partners, or FIG, committed wire fraud in connection with certain communications with plaintiffs in
the Action and another investor in a limited partnership; (v) that the defendants, with the
exception of the Company, committed substantive violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act (RICO); (vi) that the defendants conspired to violate RICO; (vii) that GFB-AS
and the general partners violated the partnership agreements of the 14 investing partnerships;
(viii) that GFB-AS, the general partners, and our Chief Financial Officer breached fiduciary duties
to the plaintiffs; and (ix) that the defendants were unjustly enriched. The plaintiffs have asked
for damages in excess of $100.0 million on each of the counts described above, including treble
damages for the RICO claims. We have filed a motion to dismiss the claims, and plan to continue to
vigorously defend this Action. A putative class action lawsuit was also filed on March 22, 2006, by
certain limited partners in four of the same partnerships involved in the Action in the Court of
Chancery for the State of Delaware captioned Edith Zimmerman et al. v. GFB-AS Investors, LLC and
Brookdale Living Communities, Inc. (the Second Action). The putative class in the Second Action
consists only of those limited partners in the four investing partnerships who are not plaintiffs
in the Action. The Second Action names as defendants BLC and GFB-AS. The complaint alleges a claim
for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of the sale of facilities indirectly owned by the
investing partnerships to Ventas and the subsequent lease of those facilities by Ventas to
subsidiaries of BLC. The plaintiffs seek, among other relief, an accounting, damages in an
unspecified amount, and disgorgement of unspecified amounts by which the defendants were allegedly
unjustly enriched. We also intend to vigorously defend this Second Action. Because these actions
are in an early stage we cannot estimate the possible range of loss, if any.
In addition, we are involved in various lawsuits and are subject to various claims arising in
the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, although the outcomes of these suits
and claims are uncertain, in the aggregate, they should not have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
12
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
5. Employee Restricted Stock Plans and Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised), Share-Based Payment, which addresses
the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or
services, with a primary focus on transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in
share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123R is a revision to SFAS No. 123 and supersedes
Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and its
related implementation guidance. This Statement requires measurement of the cost of employee
services received in exchange for stock compensation based on the grant-date fair value of the
employee stock awards. Incremental compensation costs arising from subsequent modifications of
awards after the grant date must be recognized. We adopted SFAS 123R in connection with our
initial stock compensation grant of restricted stock effective August 2005, which were converted
into BSL restricted stock on September 30, 2005.
On August 5, 2005, BLC and Alterra adopted employee restricted stock plans to attract,
motivate, and retain key employees. The plans provide for the grant of securities to those
participants selected by the board of directors. Upon adoption of the plans, restricted securities
of BLC and Alterra were granted to employees. At September 30, 2005, as a result of the formation
transactions described in Note 1, these restricted shares were converted into a total of 2.6
million shares of restricted stock in BSL at a value of $19.00 per share. Pursuant to the plans,
25% to 50% of each individuals award vested upon completion of the initial public offering on
November 22, 2005. The remaining awards vest over a period of three to five years.
On October 14, 2005, we adopted a new equity incentive plan for our employees, the Brookdale
Senior Living Inc. Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan (Incentive Plan), which was approved by our
stockholders on October 14, 2005. A total of 2.0 million shares of our common stock was initially
reserved for issuance under the plan; provided, however, that commencing on the first day of our
fiscal year beginning in calendar year 2006, the number of shares reserved and available for
issuance will be increased by an amount equal to the lesser of
(1) 0.4 million shares, or (2) 2% of
the number of outstanding shares of our common stock on the last day of the immediately preceding
fiscal year. When Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code becomes applicable, the maximum
aggregate number of shares that will be subject to stock options or stock appreciation rights that
may be granted to any individual during any fiscal year will be 0.4 million, and the maximum
aggregate number of shares that will be subject to awards of restricted stock, deferred shares,
unrestricted shares or other stock-based awards that may be granted to any individual during any
fiscal year will be 0.4 million.
As a result of the formation transactions described in Note 1, the employee restricted stock
plans described above were merged into the Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan. Additional grants of
restricted shares under the Incentive Plan were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value |
|
Total |
|
|
Grants |
|
Per Share |
|
Value |
As of December 31, 2005 |
|
|
554 |
|
|
$ |
19.00-28.52 |
|
|
$ |
10,100 |
|
Three months ended March 31, 2006 |
|
|
44 |
|
|
$ |
32.88 |
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
Compensation expense of $3.0 million was recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2006,
net of forfeitures estimated at 5% of the shares granted. The Company records compensation expense
over the requisite service period in accordance with SFAS 123R.
6. Acquisitions
On March 31, 2006, we completed the acquisition of seven senior living facilities, all of which are
owned, with 1,077 units/beds from American Senior Living L.P. for an aggregate purchase price of
$92.2 million (the Liberty Owned Portfolio). The Liberty Owned Portfolio is located in Florida,
Georgia and Tennessee all of which are owned facilities. In connection with the acquisition, we
obtained a $65.2 million first mortgage
13
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
loan,
bearing interest at a variable rate of LIBOR plus 1.75%, payable interest only through maturity in March
2011, and we entered into an interest rate swap to convert the loan from floating to fixed. The
swap is recorded as a cash flow hedge.
On March 28, 2006, we completed the acquisition of 17 assisted living facilities with 814
units/beds from the Wellington Group LLC for $79.5 million (the Wellington Portfolio). On
January 11, 2006, we signed a definitive agreement to acquire 18 facilities; however, the agreement
to acquire one facility was terminated. In connection with the acquisition we obtained $52.6
million of first mortgage financing bearing interest at a variable rate of LIBOR plus 1.70%,
payable interest only through maturity in March 2009, with two-one year extensions at our option,
and we entered into an interest rate swap to convert the loan from floating to fixed. The swap is
accounted for as a cash flow hedge. The portfolio is located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Mississippi, and Tennessee and consists of 13 owned and four leased facilities.
On February 28, 2006, we acquired two facilities in Orlando, Florida with 114 units/beds from
Orlando Madison Ivy, LLC, for an aggregate purchase price of $13.0 million. In connection with the
acquisition, we obtained an $8.8 million first mortgage bearing interest at a variable rate of
LIBOR plus 1.70% payable, interest only through maturity in December 2008, with two-one year
extensions at our option, and we entered into an interest rate swap to convert the loan from
floating to fixed. The swap is accounted for as a cash flow hedge.
The above acquisitions were accounted for using the purchase method of accounting and the
purchase price was allocated to the assets and liabilities based on their estimated fair values.
The following unaudited proforma condensed consolidated financial information sets forth the
historical information for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 derived from the historical financial statements, as adjusted to give effect to:
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustment to give effect to the refinancing of five facilities; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the Fortress CCRC Portfolio, Prudential
Portfolio, Chambrel Portfolio, Merrill Gardens Portfolio, Orlando, Fl facilities,
Wellington Portfolio and Liberty Owned Portfolio acquisitions on the statement of
operations as if these transactions closed on January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the September 30, 2005 step-up in basis of
non-controlling ownership (ownership interests not controlled or owned by affiliates of
Fortress Investment Group LLC, Minority Shareholders) due to the exchanges of Brookdale
Facility Group minority ownership for Company ownership as if the transaction was
completed on January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the consolidation of
three limited partnerships pursuant to EITF 04-5 on
January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the compensation expense in connection with the
grants under the restricted stock plan; |
|
|
|
|
Incremental general and administrative expenses related to operating as a public
company; |
|
|
|
|
Our initial public offering, repayment of indebtedness and other use of proceeds; and |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect as if we entered into the Line of Credit Agreement
on January 1, 2005. |
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated
financial information is presented
for informational purposes only, and we do not expect that this information will reflect our future
results of operations. The unaudited pro forma adjustments are based on available information and
upon assumptions that we believe are reasonable. The unaudited pro forma financial information
assumes that the transactions and our initial offering were completed as of January 1, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
236,369 |
|
|
$ |
222,188 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(5,503 |
) |
|
|
(23,845 |
) |
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(24,368 |
) |
|
|
(41,505 |
) |
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(24,870 |
) |
|
|
(41,671 |
) |
Weighted average basic and diluted loss per share |
|
$ |
(0.38 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.64 |
) |
Weighted average shares used in computing basic and diluted loss per share |
|
|
65,007 |
|
|
|
65,007 |
|
7. Segment Information
Pursuant to SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information,
we have seven reportable segments which we determined based on the way that management organizes
the segments within the enterprise for making operating decisions and assessing performance. In
addition, the management approach focuses on financial information that an enterprises decision
makers use to make decisions about the enterprises operating matters. We continue to evaluate the
type of financial information necessary for the decision makers as we implement our growth
strategies. Prior to September 30, 2005, (the date of the formation transactions) and presently,
each of Brookdale Living, and Alterra, had and has distinct chief operating decision makers, or CODMS. Each of our
facilities are considered separate operating segments because they each engage in business
activities from which they earn revenues and incur expenses, their operating results are regularly
reviewed by the CODMS to make decisions about resources to be allocated to the segment and assess
its performance, and discrete financial information is available.
14
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
SFAS No. 131 permits aggregation of operating segments that share all common operating
characteristics (similar products and services, similar methods used to deliver or provide their
products and services, and similar type and class of customer for their products and services) and
similar economic characteristics (revenue recognition and gross margin). We believe that each of
our facilities provides similar services, delivers these services in a similar manner, and has a
common type and class of customer. In addition, all of our facilities recognize and report revenue
in a similar manner. However, our individual facility gross margins vary significantly. Therefore,
we have aggregated our segments based upon the lowest common economic characteristic of each of our
facilities: gross margin. The CODMS allocate resources in large part based on margin and analyze
each of the facilities as having either (1) less than 20% operating margins, (2) more than 20%
operating margins but less than 40% operating margins, or (3) greater than 40% operating margins.
The CODMS believe that the margin is the primary, most significant and most useful indicator of the
necessary allocation of resources to each individual facility because it is the best indicator of a
facilitys operating performance and resource requirements. Accordingly, our operating segments are
aggregated into six reportable segments based on comparable operating margins within each of
Brookdale Living and Alterra. We define our operating margin for each group of facilities as that
groups operating income divided by its revenue. Operating income represents revenue less operating
expenses (excluding depreciation and amortization).
We also present a seventh reportable segment for management services because the economic and
operating characteristics of these services are different from our facilities aggregated above.
Brookdale Living
Our Brookdale Living group of facilities operates independent living facilities and CCRCs that
provide a continuum of services, including independent living, assisted living, Alzheimers care,
dementia care and skilled nursing care. Our facilities include rental facilities and three entrance
fee facilities. We also provide various ancillary services to our residents, including extensive
wellness programs, personal care and therapy services for all levels of care.
Alterra
Our Alterra group of facilities operates primarily assisted living facilities that provide
specialized assisted living care to residents in a comfortable residential atmosphere. Most of our
facilities provide specialized care, including Alzheimers and other dementia programs. These
facilities are designed to provide care in a home-like setting, as opposed to a more institutional
setting.
Management Services
Our management services segment includes facilities owned by others and operated by us
pursuant to management agreements. Under our management agreements for these facilities, we receive
management fees as well as reimbursed expense revenues, which represent the reimbursement of
certain expenses we incur on behalf of the owners.
15
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
The accounting policies of our reporting segments are the same as those described in the
summary of significant accounting policies. The following table sets forth certain segment
financial and operating data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Facility |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group |
|
|
|
Brookdale Senior |
|
|
(Predecessor |
|
|
|
Living Inc. |
|
|
Company) |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
March 31, 2005 |
|
Revenue(3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
$ |
17,724 |
|
|
$ |
3,492 |
|
20%-40% operating margin |
|
|
31,253 |
|
|
|
27,192 |
|
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
59,873 |
|
|
|
40,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Brookdale Living |
|
|
108,850 |
|
|
|
70,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alterra |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
|
13,737 |
|
|
|
15,098 |
|
20%-40% operating margin |
|
|
46,570 |
|
|
|
48,804 |
|
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
51,879 |
|
|
|
39,286 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Alterra |
|
|
112,186 |
|
|
|
103,188 |
|
Management Services |
|
|
1,147 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
222,183 |
|
|
$ |
174,983 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Income(1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
$ |
3,362 |
|
|
$ |
423 |
|
20%-40% operating margin |
|
|
10,130 |
|
|
|
8,767 |
|
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
30,244 |
|
|
|
19,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Brookdale Living |
|
|
43,736 |
|
|
|
28,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Margin |
|
|
40.2 |
% |
|
|
40.7 |
% |
Alterra |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
|
1,245 |
|
|
|
1,142 |
|
20%-40% operating margin |
|
|
15,017 |
|
|
|
15,843 |
|
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
24,093 |
|
|
|
17,931 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Alterra |
|
|
40,355 |
|
|
|
34,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Margin |
|
|
38.0 |
% |
|
|
33.8 |
% |
Management Services |
|
|
803 |
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
84,894 |
|
|
$ |
64,373 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative (including non-cash stock compensation
expense)(2) |
|
$ |
20,741 |
|
|
$ |
11,397 |
|
Facility lease expense |
|
|
45,734 |
|
|
|
46,502 |
|
Deprecation and amortization |
|
|
22,299 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
$ |
(3,880 |
) |
|
$ |
1,301 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living |
|
$ |
1,385,458 |
|
|
$ |
450,663 |
|
Alterra |
|
|
539,613 |
|
|
|
278,751 |
|
Management Services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,925,071 |
|
|
$ |
729,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Segment operating income defined as segment revenues less segment operating expenses (excluding
depreciation and amortization). |
|
(2) |
|
Net of general and administrative costs allocated to management services reporting segment. |
|
(3) |
|
All revenue is earned from external third parties in the United States. |
8. Subsequent Events
On January 12, 2006, we signed a definitive agreement to purchase seven owned and 11 leased
senior living facilities from American Senior Living L.P. As described in note 6, we acquired the
seven (1,077 units/beds) owned facilities and the remaining 11 leased facilities are under contract
for $79.5 million. The portfolio is located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and
Tennessee. The transaction for the
16
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. AND
BROOKDALE FACILITY GROUP (PREDECESSOR COMPANY)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands)
remaining facilities is expected to close in the second quarter of 2006 and is subject to
customary closing conditions.
On February 7, 2006, we signed a definitive agreement to acquire six facilities from AEW
Capital Management for $209.5 million (the AEWI Portfolio). The portfolio, located in
California, Ohio and Washington, is comprised of six independent living, assisted living and CCRC
facilities, containing a total of 1,107 units/beds. On April 28, 2006, we acquired five facilities
with 813 units/beds for $179.5 million. In connection with the acquisition, we obtained $124.5
million of first mortgage financing, bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.50%, payable interest only
through maturity in May 2009, with two-one year extensions at our option, and we entered into an
interest rate swap to convert the loan from floating to fixed. The swap is accounted for as a cash
flow hedge. The remaining facility along with a skilled nursing component of one of the facilities
acquired is expected to close during the second quarter of 2006 and is subject to customary closing
conditions and possible multiple closings.
On April 7, 2006, we completed the acquisition of 41 leased senior living facilities from
Southern Assisted Living Inc. with 2,887 units/beds (the SALI Portfolio) for $82.9 million. The
SALI Portfolio is located in North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia.
On April 14, 2006, we completed at $12.0 million financing secured by the Chambrel Portfolio,
bearing interest at 6.53% and payable principal and interest until maturity in 2013.
On May 1, 2006, we completed the acquisition of four owned senior living facilities (262
units/beds) located in Florida from Southland Suites for $24.0 million. We are in the process of
obtaining $16.0 million of first mortgage financing that is expected to close in the second quarter
of 2006; however, there is no assurance that the financing will close.
On May 12, 2006, we signed an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the ARC Merger Agreement)
pursuant to which Beta Merger Sub Corporation, our wholly-owned subsidiary, will merge with and
into American Retirement Corporation (ARC) with ARC continuing as the surviving corporation and
our wholly-owned subsidiary (the ARC Merger). Under the terms of the ARC Merger Agreement, upon
consummation of the ARC Merger, each outstanding share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share,
of ARC (ARC Common Stock), together with the rights issued pursuant to the Rights Agreement,
dated as of November 18, 1998, between ARC and American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, will be
converted into the right to receive $33.00 per share in cash. All of the options to purchase ARC
Common Stock, whether vested or unvested, will be cancelled and each holder of any such option will
be entitled to receive a cash payment equal to the product of (i) the excess of $33.00 over the
applicable option exercise price, and (ii) the number of shares of ARC Common Stock for which the
options had not been previously exercised.
Consummation
of the ARC Merger is subject to the satisfaction of various conditions, including (i)
the approval of the ARC Merger Agreement by a majority of ARCs shareholders, (ii) the
expiration or
termination of any waiting period applicable to the ARC Merger under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust
Improvements Act of 1976, and (iii) certain other closing conditions customary for transactions of
this type. The ARC Merger Agreement contains certain termination rights and certain provisions that
require ARC to pay the Company a termination fee of up to $45 million and/or reimburse the Company
for its expenses up to $5 million under certain specified circumstances.
17
Item 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
SAFE HARBOR STATEMENT UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995
Certain items in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and other information we provide from time to
time may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 including, but not necessarily limited to, statements relating to our
ability to deploy capital, close accretive acquisitions, close dispositions of under-performing
facilities, [close acquisitions under letters of intent,] close the AEW Capital Management
transaction, anticipate, manage and address industry trends and their effect on our business, pay
and grow dividends, generate growth organically or through acquisitions, secure financing and
increase revenues, earnings, Adjusted EBITDA, Cash From Facility Operations, and/or Facility
Operating Income and add residents. Words such as anticipate(s), expect(s), intend(s),
plan(s), target(s), project(s), believe(s), will, would, seek(s), estimate(s) and
similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These statements are
based on managements current expectations and beliefs and are subject to a number of factors that
could lead to actual results materially different from those described in the forward-looking
statements; Brookdale Senior Living Inc. can give no assurance that its expectations will be
attained. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from Brookdale Senior
Livings expectations include, but are not limited to, our continued ability to acquire facilities
at attractive prices which will generate returns consistent with expectations; the possibility that
the facilities that we have acquired and will acquire may not generate sufficient additional income
to justify their acquisition; possibilities that conditions to closing of certain transactions will
not be satisfied; our ability to close on facilities under non-binding letters of intent, which is
generally less probable than closing on facilities under definitive agreements; the possibilities
that changes in the capital markets, including changes in interest rates and/or credit spreads, or
other factors could make financing more expensive or unavailable to us; a decrease in the overall
demand for senior housing; general economic conditions and economic conditions in the markets in
which we operate; real estate markets in the regions where our facilities are located; competitive
pressures within the industry and/or markets in which we operate; the creditworthiness of our
residents; interest rate fluctuations; licensing risks; our failure to comply with federal, state
and local laws and regulations; our failure to comply with environmental laws; the effect of future
legislation or regulatory changes in our operations; and other risks detailed from time to time in
Brookdale Senior Livings SEC reports including in Risk Factors included in this Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q and in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our
most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed on March 31, 2006. Such forward-looking statements
speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. Brookdale Senior Living expressly disclaims any
obligation to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements contained
herein to reflect any change in our expectations with regard thereto or change in events,
conditions or circumstances on which any statement is based.
Executive Overview
As of March 31, 2006, we are the third largest operator of senior living facilities in the
United States based on total capacity with over 400 facilities in 32 states and the ability to
serve over 30,700 residents. We offer our residents access to a full continuum of services across
all sectors of the senior living industry. As of March 31, 2006, we operated 78 independent living
facilities with 13,901 units/beds, 317 assisted living facilities with 13,707 units/beds, seven
continuing care retirement communities, or CCRCs, with 3,084 units/beds (including 817
resident-owned cottages on our CCRC campuses managed by us) and one skilled nursing facility with
82 units/beds. The majority of our units/beds are located in campus settings or facilities
containing multiple services, including CCRCs. As of March 31, 2006, our facilities were on average
90.2% occupied. We generate over 96% of our revenues from private pay customers, which limits our
exposure to government reimbursement risk. In addition, we control all financial and operational
decisions regarding our facilities through property ownership and long-term leases. As of March 31,
2006, we are in compliance with the financial covenants of our debt and lease agreements. We
believe we operate in the most attractive sectors of the senior living industry with significant
opportunities to increase our revenues through providing a combination of housing, hospitality
services and health care services. For the three months ended March 31,
18
2006, 33.7% of our revenues were generated from owned facilities, 65.8% from leased facilities
and 0.5% from management fees from facilities we operate on behalf of third parties and affiliates.
We were formed in June 2005 for the purpose of combining two leading senior living operating
companies, Brookdale Living Communities, Inc., or BLC, and Alterra Healthcare Corporation, or
Alterra. BLC and Alterra have been operating independently since 1986 and 1981, respectively. Since
December 2003, BLC and Alterra have been under the common control of Fortress. Fortress owns
43,407,000 shares, or over 65% of our common stock. On November 22, 2005, we completed our initial
public offering of 12,732,800 shares of our common stock, including 8,560,800 primary shares, at
$19.00 per share, for which we received proceeds, after fees and expenses, of approximately $144.8
million.
We plan to grow our revenue and operating income through a combination of: (i) organic growth
in our existing portfolio; (ii) acquisitions of additional operating companies and facilities; and
(iii) the realization of economies of scale, including those created by the BLC and Alterra
combination. Given the size and breadth of our nationwide platform, we believe that we are well
positioned to invest in a broad spectrum of assets in the senior living industry, including
independent living, assisted living, CCRC and skilled nursing assets. Since January 2001, we have
begun leasing or acquired the ownership or management 75 senior living facilities (not including
those facilities we acquired and subsequently disposed of) with approximately 11,600 units/beds. In
2005, prior to our initial public offering, we acquired 15 senior living facilities with 4,077
units/beds (including 817 resident-owned cottages on our CCRC campuses managed by us) and two
additional facilities with an aggregate of 422 units/beds, which were sold in the third quarter of
2005, one of which we continued to manage through January, 2006. Since our initial public
offering, we have purchased or committed to purchase $750.8 million in senior housing assets
representing 104 facilities with 9,147 units/beds.
Our senior living facilities offer residents a supportive home-like setting, assistance with
activities of daily living, or ADLs, and, in a few facilities, licensed skilled nursing services.
By providing residents with a range of service options as their needs change, we provide greater
continuity of care, enabling seniors to age-in-place and thereby maintain residency with us for a
longer period of time. The ability of residents to age-in-place is also beneficial to our residents
and their families who are burdened with care decisions for their elderly relatives.
Our
independent living facilities average resident is 83 years old and desires or needs a
more supportive living environment. The average independent living resident resides in an
independent living facility for 32 months. Many of our residents relocate to one of
our independent living facilities in order to be in a metropolitan area that is closer to their
adult children. Our assisted living facilities average resident is an 83 year old who requires
assistance with two or three ADLs. 85% of our assisted living residents require medication
management. The average assisted living resident resides in an assisted living facility for
22 months. Residents typically enter an assisted living facility due to a relatively
immediate need for services that might have been triggered by a medical event or need. Our assisted
living facilities consist of 75% traditional assisted living facilities and 25% memory care
facilities.
Overbuilding in the late 1990s in the senior living industry put downward pressure on the
occupancy rates and the resident fees of certain senior living providers. The slowdown in
construction and lack of construction financing since 1999 has led to a reduction in the supply of
new units being constructed. Growing demand for senior living services has resulted in a recent
trend towards increasing occupancy rates and resident fees for operators of existing facilities.
Growing consumer awareness among seniors and their families concerning the types of services
provided by independent and assisted living operators has further contributed to the opportunities
in the senior living industry. Also, seniors possess greater financial resources, which makes it
more likely that they are able to
19
afford to live in market-rate senior housing. Seniors in the geographic areas in which we operate
tend to have a significant amount of assets generated from savings, pensions and, due to strong
national housing markets, the sale of private homes.
Challenges in our industry include increased state and local regulation of the assisted living
industry, which has led to an increase in the cost of doing business; the regulatory environment
continues to intensify in the amount and types of laws and regulations affecting us, accompanied by
an increase by state and local officials in enforcement thereof. In addition, like other companies,
our financial results may be negatively impacted by increasing employment costs including salaries,
wages and benefits, such as health care, for our employees. Increases in the costs of utilities and
real estate taxes will also have a negative impact on our financial results.
Formation Transactions
We are a holding company formed in June 2005 for the purpose of combining, through a series of
mergers, two leading senior living operating companies, BLC and Alterra. The combination of these
two companies created a nationwide operating platform to grow our existing portfolio, realize
economies of scale and add to our existing portfolio through strategic acquisitions of existing
assets and/or senior living portfolios. In connection with the combination of BLC and Alterra, we
negotiated new contracts for food, insurance and other goods and services and have and will
continue to consolidate our corporate functions such as accounting, finance, human resources and
legal, which are collectively expected to result in recurring operating and general and
administrative expense savings, net of additional recurring costs expected to be incurred as a
public company, of between approximately $13.0 million and
$15.0 million per year. We began to realize these savings upon
completion of the formation transactions in September 2005 and expect to realize the remainder
subsequent to the formation.
In addition to the combination of BLC and Alterra, Fortress contributed FIT REN, which owned
nine facilities, (including the Prudential Portfolio), to Alterra in exchange for membership
interests in FEBC and merged Fortress CCRC (including the Fortress CCRC Portfolio) with and into a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company in exchange for shares of our common stock. Alterra
purchased the Prudential Portfolio to expand its western presence and to strengthen its overall
financial position. These portfolios together consisted of 17 senior living facilities with an
aggregate of 4,499 units, of which two facilities with an aggregate of 422 units/beds were sold on
July 1, 2005 and September 14, 2005, for $2.5 million and $9.0 million, respectively, and the
proceeds of which were contributed to us in the series of formation transactions described in
Business History. An affiliate of BLC managed one of these facilities through January 2006.
All of the preceding were purchased in the second and third quarter of 2005 by affiliates of
Fortress.
As a holding company, we own 100% of the outstanding stock and membership interests of the
operating companies of our business. The previous stockholders and members of the operating
companies contributed their ownership interests to us in exchange for shares of our common stock.
For financial reporting purposes, the Fortress entities that own the stock or membership interests
in the operating companies are considered the control group as defined under paragraph 3 of EITF
No. 02-5, Definition of Common Control in relation to FASB Statement No. 141. Accordingly, the
combined financial statements of the Predecessor Company reflect the historical cost of the
operating companies. Upon the completion of the formation transactions on September 30, 2005, the
non-controlling minority interests were accounted for as a purchase in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141.
As a result of these transactions we are the third largest operator of senior living
facilities in the United States based on total capacity.
20
Acquisitions
Our financial results are impacted by the timing, size and number of acquisitions, leases and
sale-leasebacks we complete in a period. During the three months ended March31, 2006, the number of
facilities we owned or leased increased by 26, which resulted in an increase of approximately 2,005
units/beds, for an aggregate purchase price or lease value of approximately $184.6 million.
On March 31, 2006, we acquired seven owned senior living facilities with 1,077 units/beds from
American Senior Living L.P. for $92.1 million (the Liberty Owned Portfolio). The Liberty Owned
Portfolio is located in Florida, Georgia and Tennessee. In connection with the acquisition, we
obtained a $65.2 million first mortgage loan, secured by the facilities, payable interest only at
LIBOR plus 1.75%, through maturity in March 2011, and we entered into an interest rate swap to
convert the loan from floating to fixed. The swap is recorded as a cash flow hedge. We expect to
complete the closing on the remaining 11 facilities in the second quarter of 2006.
On March 28, 2006, we acquired 17 assisted living facilities with 814 units/beds from the
Wellington Group LLC for $79.5 million (the Wellington Portfolio). The portfolio is located in
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, and Tennessee and is divided into 13 owned and four leased
facilities. In connection with the acquisition, we obtained a $52.6 million first mortgage loan,
secured by the facilities, bearing interest at a variable rate of LIBOR plus 1.70%, payable
interest only through maturity in March 2009, with two one-year extensions at our option, and we
entered into an interest rate swap to convert the loan from floating to fixed. The swap is
recorded as a cash flow hedge. We originally signed an agreement to acquire 18 facilities;
however, the agreement to acquire one facility was terminated.
On February 28, 2006, we acquired two facilities in Orlando, Florida with 114 units/beds from
Orlando Madison Ivy, LLC for an aggregate purchase price of $13.0 million. In connection with the
acquisition, we obtained an $8.8 million first mortgage loan, secured by the facilities, bearing
interest at a variable rate of LIBOR plus 1.70%, payable interest only through maturity in December
2008, with two one-year extensions at our option, and we entered into an interest rate swap to
convert the loan from floating to fixed. The swap is recorded as a cash flow hedge.
On December 30, 2005, we completed the acquisition of the entire share of capital stock of
CMCP Properties Inc. from Capstead Mortgage Corporation, or Capstead. The purchase was structured
as a stock transaction, at a total cost of $181.0 million, consisting of a $57.5 million cash
payment and assumption of $119.8 million of debt. At closing we obtained a $30.0 million first
mortgage loan against one of the facilities bearing interest at 6.085% payable interest only until
February 2011 and principal and interest thereafter until maturity in February, 2013 and we repaid
an existing $19.0 million loan against the facility. In connection with the refinancing we
incurred a loss on extinguishment of $2.5 million. The portfolio is comprised of six independent
and assisted living facilities (the Chambrel Portfolio), containing a total of 1,394 units and is
located in Florida, Georgia, Virginia, Ohio and Texas. Subsidiaries of BLC have leased and
operated the facilities since May 1, 2002.
On December 22, 2005, we acquired four assisted living facilities (187 units/beds) from
Merrill Gardens for an aggregate purchase price of $16.3 million. On November 30, 2005, we
completed the acquisition of six facilities (237 units/beds) from Omega Healthcare Investors, Inc.
(Omega) pursuant to our exercise of a purchase option, for an aggregate purchase price of $20.4
million. These acquisitions were financed by $24.0 million of first mortgage financing bearing
interest at LIBOR plus 1.70%, payable interest only through maturity in December 2008, with two
one-year extensions at our option, and we entered into an interest rate swap to convert the loan
from floating to fixed. The swap is recorded as a cash flow hedge.
The
above acquisitions were accounted for using the purchase method of
accounting and the purchase price was allocated to the assets and
liabilities based on their estimated fair values.
The following unaudited proforma condensed consolidated financial information sets forth the
historical information for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 derived from the historical financial statements, as adjusted to give effect to:
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustment to give effect to the refinancing of five facilities; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the Fortress CCRC Portfolio, Prudential
Portfolio, Chambrel Portfolio, Merrill Gardens Portfolio, Orlando, Fl facilities,
Wellington Portfolio and Liberty Owned Portfolio acquisitions on the statement of
operations as if these transactions closed on January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the September 30, 2005 step-up in basis of
non-controlling ownership (ownership interests not controlled or owned by affiliates of
Fortress Investment Group LLC, Minority Shareholders) due to the exchanges of Brookdale
Facility Group minority ownership for Company ownership as if the transaction was
completed on January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the consolidation of
three limited partnerships pursuant to EITF 04-5 on
January 1, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect to the compensation expense in connection with the
grants under the restricted stock plan; |
|
|
|
|
Incremental general and administrative expenses related to operating as a public
company; |
|
|
|
|
Our initial public offering, repayment of indebtedness and other use of proceeds; and |
|
|
|
|
Pro forma adjustments to give effect as if we entered into the Line of Credit Agreement
on January 1, 2005. |
The following unaudited pro forma
condensed consolidated financial information is
presented for informational purposes only, as we do not expect that this information will reflect
our future results of operations. The unaudited pro forma adjustments are based on available
information and upon assumptions that we believe are reasonable. The unaudited pro forma financial
information assumes that the transactions and our initial public offering were completed as of
January 1, 2005.
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
Three Months |
|
|
Ended |
|
Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
March 31, 2005 |
Revenues |
|
$ |
236,369 |
|
|
$ |
222,188 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(5,503 |
) |
|
|
(23,845 |
) |
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(24,368 |
) |
|
|
(41,505 |
) |
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(24,870 |
) |
|
|
(41,671 |
) |
Weighted average basic and diluted loss per share |
|
$ |
(0.38 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.64 |
) |
Weighted average shares used in computing basic and diluted loss per share |
|
|
65,007 |
|
|
|
65,007 |
|
Segments
We have seven reportable segments which we determined based on the way that management
organizes the segments within the enterprise for making operating decisions and assessing
performance. In addition, the management approach focuses on financial information that an
enterprises decision makers use to make decisions about the enterprises operating matters. We
continue to evaluate the type of financial information necessary for the decision makers as we
implement our growth strategies. Prior to September 30, 2005 (the date of the formation
transactions described in Business History of our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC
on March 31, 2006 and presently, each of Brookdale Living, which includes BLC, the Fortress CCRC
Portfolio and the Prudential Portfolio, and Alterra, had and has distinct chief operating decision
makers, or CODMS. Each of our facilities are considered separate operating segments because they
each engage in business activities from which they earn revenues and incur expenses, their
operating results are regularly reviewed by the CODMS to make decisions about resources to be
allocated to the segment and assess its performance, and discrete financial information is
available.
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information, permits
aggregation of operating segments that share all common operating characteristics (similar products
and services, similar methods used to deliver or provide their products and services, and similar
type and class of customer for their products and services) and similar economic characteristics
(revenue recognition and gross margin). We believe that each of our facilities provides similar
services, delivers these services in a similar manner, and has common type and class of customer.
In addition, all of our facilities recognize and report revenue in a similar manner. However, our
individual facility gross margins vary significantly. Therefore, we have aggregated our segments
based upon the lowest common economic characteristic of each of our facilities: gross margin. The
CODMS allocate resources in large part based on margin and analyze each of the facilities as having
either (1) less than 20% operating margins, (2) more than 20% operating margins but less than 40%
operating margins, or (3) greater than 40% operating margins. The CODMS believe that the margin is
the primary, most significant and most useful indicator of the necessary allocation of resources to
each individual facility because it is the best indicator of a facilitys operating performance and
resource requirements. Accordingly, our operating segments are aggregated into six reportable
segments based on comparable operating margins within each of Brookdale Living and Alterra. We
define our operating margin for each group of facilities as that groups operating income divided
by its revenue. Operating income represents revenue less operating expenses (excluding
depreciation and amortization).
We also present a seventh reportable segment for management services because the economic and
operating characteristics of these services are different from our facilities aggregated above.
Brookdale Living. Our Brookdale Living group of facilities operates independent living
facilities and CCRCs that provide a continuum of services, including independent living, assisted
living, Alzheimers care, dementia care and skilled nursing care. Our facilities include rental
facilities and three entrance fee facilities. We also provide various ancillary services to our
residents, including extensive wellness programs, personal care and therapy services for all levels
of care. Our facilities are large, often in campus or high-rise settings, with an average unit/bed
capacity of 210 units/beds. These facilities generally maintain high and consistent
22
occupancy levels. We operate 69 facilities, with an aggregate capacity of 14,497 units/beds,
representing approximately 47% of the total unit/bed capacity of our facilities.
Alterra. Our Alterra group of facilities operates primarily assisted living facilities that
provide specialized assisted living care to residents in a comfortable residential atmosphere. Most
of our facilities provide specialized care, including Alzheimers and other dementia programs.
These facilities are designed to provide care in a home-like setting, as opposed to a more
institutional setting. Our assisted living facilities target residents generally requiring
assistance with two or three ADLs and are generally smaller than our Brookdale Living facilities,
with an average unit/bed capacity of 44 units/beds. We operate 324 facilities, with an aggregate
capacity of 14,309 units/beds, representing approximately 47% of the total unit/bed capacity of our
facilities.
Management Services. Our management services segment includes 10 facilities owned by others
and operated by us pursuant to management agreements. Under our management agreements for these
facilities, we receive management fees as well as reimbursed expense revenues, which represent the
reimbursement of certain expenses we incur on behalf of the owners. These 10 facilities have an
aggregate capacity of 1,964 units/beds, representing approximately 6% of the total unit/bed
capacity of our facilities.
Revenues
We generate all of our revenues from resident fees, entrance fees and management fees. For the
three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, approximately 99.5% and 0.5% and 99.5% and 0.5% of our
revenues were generated from resident fees and management fees, respectively. In addition, we
generated a small amount of revenue from entrance fees, which accounted for less than 0.1% of our
revenue during this period.
We derive over 96% of our resident fees from private pay sources. Our resident fees are paid,
on a monthly basis in advance, by residents, their families or other responsible parties, typically
out of personal income, assets or other savings. As a result, economic downturns or changes in
demographics, among other things, could impact our ability to charge and collect resident fees.
Ancillary charges are billed in arrears.
Resident Fees. We generate resident fee revenue on a monthly basis from each resident in each
facility that we own and operate or lease and operate. The rates we charge are highly dependent on
local market conditions and the competitive environment in which the facilities operate.
Substantially all of our independent and assisted living residency agreements allow for adjustments
in the monthly fee payable thereunder not less frequently than 12 or 13 months or monthly,
respectively, thereby enabling us to seek increases in monthly fees due to inflation, increased
levels of care or other factors. Any such pricing increase would be subject to market and
competitive conditions and could result in a decrease in occupancy in the facilities. In addition,
regulations governing assisted living facilities in several states stipulate that each resident
must have the right to terminate the resident agreement for any reason on reasonable notice.
Consistent with these regulations, a majority of our assisted living resident agreements allow
residents to terminate their agreements upon 0 to 30 days notice. Our independent living
facilities generally allow residents to terminate their leases upon the need for a higher level of
care not provided at the facility or death.
Upon termination of a lease, the resident is usually obligated to pay rent for the lesser of
60 days after he or she vacates the unit or until the unit is rented by another resident.
On average, for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, we generated resident fees of
approximately $221.0 million at $3,116 per unit/bed per month, and approximately $174.1 million at
$2,903 per unit/bed, respectively. The increases were attributable to increased rates at our
existing facilities and integration of the recent acquisitions into our operations.
Entrance Fees. In three of our CCRC facilities, independent living residents pay an entrance
fee upon moving into the facility in addition to a monthly fee. We have two types of entrance fee
arrangements, as described below.
23
In two of our facilities, a portion of the entrance fee is generally non-refundable and a
portion is refundable. The non-refundable portion of the fee is initially recorded as deferred
revenue and amortized to revenue over the estimated stay of the resident in the facility. The
refundable portion of the fee is generally refundable upon the resale of the unit, or in certain
agreements upon resale of a comparable unit or 12 months after the resident vacates the unit and is
classified as current liabilities. Based on market conditions and resident preferences we
periodically review our entrance fee arrangements to determine the amount of the fee and the
allocation between the refundable and non-refundable portions.
In one facility the entrance fee is refundable to the resident pro rata over a 67-month
period. Accordingly, the fee is amortized to revenue over 67 months.
For the three months ended March 31, 2006, we received $2.1 million of entrance fees and
refunded $0.7 million. We had no entrance fees prior to April 2005. Of the amount received, $0.4
million is deferred and amortized and $31.6 million, including net obligations assumed in
connection with the purchase, is refundable to the resident generally upon resale of the unit or a
comparable unit.
Management Fees. Management fees are monthly fees that we collect from owners of facilities
for which we are the manager. Management fees typically range from 2.8% to 5.0% of the facilitys
total gross revenues. All management fees are recognized as revenues when services are provided.
For the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, we earned approximately $1.1 million and $0.9
million, respectively, in management fee revenue. Management fee revenues increased primarily due
to termination fees of $0.2 received in connection with the third party owners sale
of four facilities during the three months ended March 31, 2006.
The terms of our management agreements generally range from one to three years and can be
cancelled by the facility owners for cause, sale of the facility or upon 30 to 60 days notice at
renewal.
Operating Expenses
We classify our operating expenses into the following categories: (i) facility operating
expenses, which include labor, food, marketing and other direct facility expenses, insurance and
real estate taxes; (ii) general and administrative expenses, which primarily include the cost to
staff and maintain our corporate headquarters, our regional and divisional operating infrastructure
and other overhead costs; (iii) facility lease payments; and (iv) depreciation and amortization.
Financial Developments
The following are certain changes in our financial results that have occurred or that we
expect to occur in 2006 and beyond, as compared to our 2005 results.
As a new public company, we have incurred, and will continue to incur, significant legal,
accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company related to corporate
governance, Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, reporting requirements under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and compliance with the various provisions
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. In particular, we expect to incur significant incremental
expenses associated with Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 compliance documentation and remediation. In
addition, as a New York Stock Exchange-listed company, we were required to establish an internal
audit function, and did so, on an outsourced basis. As a result, we will incur additional cost
associated with this function. We also expect these new rules and regulations to make it more
difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may
be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. We
expect the legal, accounting and other expenses that we will incur as a public company to result in
general and administrative costs of approximately $4.1 million in 2006 and approximately $2.5
million thereafter on an annual basis. We expect to fund these additional costs using cash flows
from operations and from financing activities such as this offering and additional indebtedness,
including availability under our expected lines of credit.
24
As of March 31, 2006, our facilities were 90.2% occupied. We expect to maintain and increase
these occupancy levels due to the projected demand for senior living services; however, there can
be no assurance that we will maintain or increase this occupancy level or the resident fees we
charge for our services. Due to the stable nature of our portfolio, we do not expect to add
significant personnel to our facilities as occupancy increases; however, we are subject to wage and
benefit cost increases as we strive to attract and retain skilled management and staff at our
facilities. In addition, we are subject to increases in other operating expenses such as: real
estate taxes, as the taxing authorities are under increasing pressure to raise revenues; utilities,
as a result of the recent oil shortages and supply problems; and insurance costs.
General and administrative costs have increased primarily due to the increase in the number of
facilities we own, lease and manage. During 2005, we purchased the Fortress CCRC Portfolio (eight
facilities with 3,238 units/beds of which 817 are resident-owned cottages managed by us; we sold
two of these facilities in the third quarter of 2005, one of which we continued to manage through
January 2006), we purchased the Prudential Portfolio (nine facilities with 1,261 units/beds), we
purchased the Chambrel Portfolio (six facilities with 1,394/beds) from Capstead that we previously
leased, we purchased the Merrill Gardens Portfolio four facilities, with 187 units/beds, and we
purchased six facilities with 237 units/beds from Omega (the Omega Portfolio) that we previously
leased. During 2006, we purchased two facilities with 114 units/beds from Orlando Madison Ivy,
LLC, we purchased the Wellington Portfolio (17 facilities with 814 units/beds), we purchased the
Liberty Owned Portfolio (seven facilities with 1,077 units/beds), we purchased the SALI Portfolio
(41 facilities with 12,877 units/beds) and we purchased the AEW I Portfolio (five facilities with
813 units/beds). These acquisitions, excluding the Capstead and Omega acquisitions, required us to
add incremental corporate staff to oversee these facilities, and we expect to incur similar
incremental and general and administrative costs in the future as we acquire additional senior
housing facilities.
Historically we have leased facilities under long-term leases. We intend to finance our future
acquisitions primarily through a combination of traditional mortgage debt and equity and to reduce
our use of sale-leaseback transactions. As a result, we expect the overall percentage of our
revenues derived from our leased portfolio to decline. From a business standpoint, there is no
fundamental difference in the way we manage the operations of our leased versus owned facilities,
while from a financial standpoint, financing future acquisitions with traditional mortgage
financing and equity is expected to generate more cash flow to distribute to our stockholders and
the opportunity to generate additional proceeds from future refinancing opportunities.
Due to the fact that we are an acquisition-focused company, as we evaluate operating companies
and facilities for potential acquisition, we incur costs both internally and for various third
parties assistance, including in connection with due diligence, negotiation and structuring of
these acquisitions. These third party costs are capitalized once the acquisition is deemed
probable. If an acquisition is abandoned, these costs will be expensed. If the acquisition is
consummated, these third party costs will be capitalized as a part of the total purchase price.
Results of Operations
Comparison of Three Months Ended March 31, 2006 to Three Months Ended March 31, 2005
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, statement of operations items and
the amount and percentage of increase or decrease of these items. The results of operations for any
particular period are not necessarily indicative of results for any future period. The following
data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated and combined financial statements and the
notes thereto, which are included herein. Our results reflect the inclusion of the Fortress CCRC
Portfolio (effective April 2005), the Prudential Portfolio (effective June/July 2005), the Merrill
Gardens Portfolio (effective November 2005) the Omega and Chambrel Portfolios (effective December
2005), two facilities in Orlando, Florida (effective February 2006), Liberty Owned Portfolio and
the Wellington Portfolio (effective March 2006) into our operations. BSL completed its formation
transaction on September 30, 2005. Results prior to that date represent the combined operations of
Brookdale Facility Group (Predecessor Company):
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
% Increase |
|
Statement of Operations Data: |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resident fees: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
$ |
17,724 |
|
|
$ |
3,492 |
|
|
$ |
14,232 |
|
|
|
407.6 |
% |
20% - 40% operating margin |
|
|
31,253 |
|
|
|
27,192 |
|
|
|
4,061 |
|
|
|
14.9 |
% |
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
59,873 |
|
|
|
40,240 |
|
|
|
19,633 |
|
|
|
48.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
108,850 |
|
|
|
70,924 |
|
|
|
37,926 |
|
|
|
53.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alterra: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
|
13,737 |
|
|
|
15,098 |
|
|
|
(1,361 |
) |
|
|
(9.0 |
%) |
20% - 40% operating margin |
|
|
46,570 |
|
|
|
48,804 |
|
|
|
(2,234 |
) |
|
|
(4.6 |
%) |
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
51,879 |
|
|
|
39,286 |
|
|
|
12,593 |
|
|
|
32.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
112,186 |
|
|
|
103,188 |
|
|
|
8,998 |
|
|
|
8.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total resident fees |
|
|
221,036 |
|
|
|
174,112 |
|
|
|
46,924 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
% |
Management fees |
|
|
1,147 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
31.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
|
222,183 |
|
|
|
174,983 |
|
|
|
47,200 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility operating: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
|
14,362 |
|
|
|
3,069 |
|
|
|
11,293 |
|
|
|
368.0 |
% |
20% - 40% operating margin |
|
|
21,123 |
|
|
|
18,425 |
|
|
|
2,698 |
|
|
|
14.6 |
% |
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
29,629 |
|
|
|
20,583 |
|
|
|
9,046 |
|
|
|
43.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
65,114 |
|
|
|
42,077 |
|
|
|
23,037 |
|
|
|
54.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alterra: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 20% operating margin |
|
|
12,492 |
|
|
|
13,956 |
|
|
|
(1,464 |
) |
|
|
(10.5 |
%) |
20% - 40% operating margin |
|
|
31,553 |
|
|
|
32,961 |
|
|
|
(1,408 |
) |
|
|
(4.3 |
%) |
Greater than 40% operating margin |
|
|
27,786 |
|
|
|
21,355 |
|
|
|
6,431 |
|
|
|
30.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
71,831 |
|
|
|
68,272 |
|
|
|
3,559 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total facility operating expenses |
|
|
136,945 |
|
|
|
110,349 |
|
|
|
26,596 |
|
|
|
24.1 |
% |
Lease expense |
|
|
45,734 |
|
|
|
46,502 |
|
|
|
(768 |
) |
|
|
(1.7 |
%) |
General and administrative |
|
|
21,085 |
|
|
|
11,658 |
|
|
|
9,427 |
|
|
|
80.9 |
% |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
22,299 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
|
|
17,126 |
|
|
|
331.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
226,063 |
|
|
|
173,682 |
|
|
|
52,381 |
|
|
|
30.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(3,880 |
) |
|
|
1,301 |
|
|
|
(5,181 |
) |
|
|
(398.2 |
%) |
Interest income |
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
51.1 |
% |
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
(13,690 |
) |
|
|
(9,125 |
) |
|
|
(4,565 |
) |
|
|
(50.0 |
%) |
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
(423 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
|
|
(66.2 |
%) |
Change in fair value of derivatives |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
4,062 |
|
|
|
(4,163 |
) |
|
|
(102.5 |
%) |
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
|
|
(1,334 |
) |
|
|
(453 |
) |
|
|
(881 |
) |
|
|
(194.5 |
%) |
Equity in earnings (loss) of
unconsolidated ventures, net of minority
interests |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(18,824 |
) |
|
|
(4,129 |
) |
|
|
(14,695 |
) |
|
|
(355.9 |
%) |
(Provision) benefit for income taxes |
|
|
(386 |
) |
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
(132.5 |
%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income loss before minority interest |
|
|
(19,210 |
) |
|
|
(4,295 |
) |
|
|
(14,915 |
) |
|
|
(347.3 |
%) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
2,532 |
|
|
|
(2,648 |
) |
|
|
(104.6 |
%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before discontinued
operations |
|
|
(19,326 |
) |
|
|
(1,763 |
) |
|
|
(17,563 |
) |
|
|
(996.2 |
%) |
Discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,798 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,528 |
) |
|
|
(974.9 |
%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selected Operating and Other Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of facilities (at end of period) |
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
% |
Total units/beds operated(1) |
|
|
30,770 |
|
|
|
26,109 |
|
|
|
4,661 |
|
|
|
17.9 |
% |
Owned/leased facilities units/beds |
|
|
28,806 |
|
|
|
22,541 |
|
|
|
6,265 |
|
|
|
27.8 |
% |
Owned/leased facilities occupancy rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period end |
|
|
89.7 |
% |
|
|
89.0 |
% |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
Weighted average |
|
|
89.5 |
% |
|
|
89.1 |
% |
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
0.4 |
% |
Average monthly revenue per unit/beds(2) |
|
$ |
3,116 |
|
|
$ |
2,903 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
% |
Selected Segment Operating and Other Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Facilities (period end) |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
40.8 |
% |
Total Units/beds |
|
|
14,497 |
|
|
|
9,477 |
|
|
|
5,202 |
|
|
|
53.0 |
% |
Occupancy Rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period end |
|
|
90.8 |
% |
|
|
92.8 |
% |
|
|
(2.0 |
%) |
|
|
(2.2 |
%) |
Weighted average |
|
|
90.9 |
% |
|
|
92.7 |
% |
|
|
(1.8 |
%) |
|
|
(1.9 |
%) |
Average monthly rate per unit/bed(2) |
|
$ |
2,969 |
|
|
$ |
2,724 |
|
|
$ |
245 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
% |
Alterra: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Facilities (period end) |
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
% |
Total Units/beds |
|
|
14,309 |
|
|
|
13,064 |
|
|
|
1,245 |
|
|
|
9.5 |
% |
Occupancy Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period end |
|
|
88.6 |
% |
|
|
86.2 |
% |
|
|
2.4 |
% |
|
|
2.8 |
% |
Weighted average |
|
|
88.2 |
% |
|
|
86.6 |
% |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
1.8 |
% |
Average monthly rate per unit/bed(2) |
|
$ |
3,191 |
|
|
$ |
3,041 |
|
|
$ |
150 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
% |
Managed: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
% Increase |
|
Statement of Operations Data: |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
Number of Facilities (period end) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(44.4 |
%) |
Total Units/beds |
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
|
3,568 |
|
|
|
(1,604 |
) |
|
|
(45.0 |
%) |
Occupancy Rate(3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period end |
|
|
92.7 |
% |
|
|
82.3 |
% |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
|
|
12.6 |
% |
Weighted average |
|
|
92.0 |
% |
|
|
82.7 |
% |
|
|
9.3 |
% |
|
|
11.2 |
% |
Average monthly rate per unit/beds(2) |
|
$ |
2,381 |
|
|
$ |
2,350 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Total units/beds operated represent the total units/beds operated as of the end of the
period. Occupancy rate is calculated by dividing total occupied units/beds by total units/beds
operated as of the end of the period. |
|
(2) |
|
Average monthly revenue per unit/bed represents the average of the total monthly revenues
divided by occupied units/beds at the end of the period averaged over the respective period
presented. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes facilities managed by us but excludes Town Village Oklahoma City, which is under
development and was sold January, 2006. |
Revenues
Total revenues increased primarily due to increased resident fees of approximately $46.9
million, or 27.0% and an increase in management fees of $0.3 million, or 31.7%.
Resident fee revenue
Resident
fees increased by approximately $10.6 million, or 6.4%, at the facilities we
operated during both periods which excludes the lease-up of four facilities. The remaining
increase in resident fee revenue was primarily due to the addition of the Fortress CCRC Portfolio,
the Prudential Portfolio, the Merrill Gardens Portfolio, two facilities located in Orlando,
Florida, the Liberty Owned Portfolio and the Wellington Portfolio into our operations effective
April, June/July, December 2005 and February and March 2006, respectively.
Brookdale Living revenue increased $37.9 million, or 53.5%, primarily due to the addition of
the Fortress CCRC Portfolio and the Prudential Portfolio into our operations effective April and
June/July 2005, respectively. The Prudential Portfolio and the Fortress CCRC Portfolio had lower
occupancies at the acquisition which resulted in 1.8% decline in average occupancy. The Prudential
Portfolio had higher average monthly rates which were partially offset by the Fortress CCRC
Portfolios average rate as the independent living units/beds at three facilities charge an
entrance fee which is deferred and amortized over the expected stay of the resident.
Alterra revenue increased $9.0 million, or 8.7%, primarily due to the addition of the Merrill
Gardens Portfolio and the Wellington Portfolio, a 1.8% increase in average occupancy and a 4.9%
increase in average monthly rent per unit/bed.
Management fee revenue
Management fee revenue increased over this period primarily due to termination fees of $0.2
million received in connection with the third party owners sale of four facilities during the
three months ended March 31, 2006.
Operating Expenses
The increase in total operating expenses was attributable to the following: (i) facility
operating expenses increased $26.6 million, or 24.1%; (ii) general and administrative expenses
increased $9.4 million, or 80.9%; and (iii) depreciation and amortization expenses increased $17.1
million, or 331.1% offset by a decrease in lease expense of $0.8 million, or 1.7%.
27
Explanations of significant variances noted in individual line-item expenses for the three months
ended March 31, 2006 as compared to the three months ended March 31, 2005 are as follows:
|
|
|
Of our increased facility operating expenses, $2.0 million, or 1.8% of the increase was
attributable to the facilities we operated during both periods which
excludes the lease up of four facilities. The remaining increase
was primarily due to the addition of the Fortress CCRC Portfolio, the Prudential Portfolio
and the Merrill Gardens Portfolio into our operations effective April, June/July, and
December 2005, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
Brookdale Living facility operating expenses increased $23.0 million, or 54.7%, primarily due
to the addition of the Fortress CCRC Portfolio and the Prudential Portfolio into our
operations effective April and June/July 2005, respectively. The balance was primarily due to
increases in salaries, wages and benefits. |
|
|
|
|
Alterra facility operating expenses increased $3.6 million, or 5.2%, primarily due to the
Merrill Gardens acquisition and increased salaries, wages and benefits as a result of
increased occupancy and level of care provided to residents. |
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses increased $9.4 million, or 80.9%, primarily as a
result of $3.0 million of non-recurring costs, non-cash compensation expense of $3.0 million as a result of our adoption
of SFAS No. 123R, an increase in salaries, wages and benefits, an increase in the number of
employees in anticipation of and in connection with the acquisitions. General and
administrative expense as a percentage of total revenue, including revenue generated by the
facilities we manage was 6.4% and 6.0% for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, calculated as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Combined resident fee revenues |
|
$ |
221,036 |
|
|
$ |
174,112 |
|
Resident fee revenues under management |
|
|
12,909 |
|
|
|
19,734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
233,945 |
|
|
$ |
193,846 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses (excluding merger and
integration expenses and non-cash stock compensation expense
totaling $6.0 million in 2006) |
|
$ |
15,060 |
|
|
$ |
11,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses as of % of total revenues |
|
|
6.4 |
% |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease expense decreased by $0.8 million, or 1.7%, primarily due to the acquisition of
the Omega and Chambrel Portfolios in December 2005 which were previously leased by us and
includes $5.3 million of additional straight-line rent expense,
partially offset by $1.1 million of additional deferred gain amortization. |
|
|
|
|
Total depreciation and amortization expense increased by $17.1 million, or 331.1%,
primarily due to the step-up in minority interest recorded in connection with the initial
public offering, increased capital expenditures and leasehold improvements and the addition
of the Fortress CCRC, Prudential, Omega and Chambrel Portfolio acquisitions. |
|
|
|
|
Interest income increased $0.4 million, or 51.1%, primarily due to an increase in cash
and cash equivalents invested from our initial public offering and cash flow from
operations. |
|
|
|
|
Interest expense increased $9.0 million, or 164.2%, primarily due to additional debt in
connection with our acquisitions and the change in the fair value liability of the interest
rate swaps from the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005. |
28
Liquidity and Capital Resources
We had $94.1 million of cash and cash equivalents at March 31, 2006, excluding cash and
investments- restricted and lease security deposits of $69.3 million. In addition, we had $20.0
million available under our revolving credit agreement.
As discussed below, we had a net increase in cash and cash equivalents of $16.4 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2006.
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities was $12.1 million and $(4.4) million for
the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The increase of $16.5 million was
primarily due to recent acquisitions and the decrease in lease expense as a result of Omega and
Chambrel Portfolios acquired in the fourth quarter 2005. Changes in current assets and current
liabilities primarily relate to the timing of collections of resident fees and payment of operating
expenses, including salaries and wages, real estate taxes and insurance.
Net cash (used in) investing activities was $(186.0) million and $(1.8) million for the three
months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. During the three months ended March 31, 2006 we
used $197.9 million to purchase two facilities in Orlando, Florida, the Liberty Owned Portfolio and
the Wellington Portfolio, respectively, and to fund capital improvements at our existing
facilities.
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities was $190.3 million and $(4.6) million for
the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. During the three months ended March
31, 2006, we received $214.8 million of net proceeds from debt primarily as a result of the debt
incurred in connection with our acquisitions and draws on our line of credit to fund a portion of
the equity required for these acquisitions and the acquisition of the SALI Portfolio that closed on
April 7, 2006, partially offset by the repayment of
$3.9 million of debt, payment of a $16.5
million dividend in January 2006 and payment of financing costs of $5.0 million.
To date we have financed our operations primarily with cash generated from operations, both
short- and long-term borrowings and draws from our line of credit.
At March 31, 2006, we had $897.8 million of debt outstanding at a weighted-average interest
rate of 6.98%, of which $10.8 million was due in the next 12 months and primarily attributable to
the three limited partnerships consolidated pursuant to EITF 04-5.
In addition, in February 2006 we entered into a $330.0 million credit agreement, consisting of
a $250.0 million term loan, a $20.0 million revolving loan, and a $60.0 million letters of credit
commitment of which $87.0 million is drawn on the term loan and $56.0 million of letters of credit
have been issued as of March 31, 2006. See New Credit Facility below.
Our liquidity requirements have historically arisen from, and we expect they will continue to
arise from, working capital, general and administrative costs, debt service and lease payments,
acquisition costs, employee compensation and related benefits, capital improvements and dividend
payments. In the past, we have met our cash requirements for operations using cash flows from
operating revenues, the receipt of resident fees and the receipt of management fees from
third-party-managed facilities. In addition to using cash flows from operating revenues, we use
available funds from our indebtedness and long-term leasing of our facilities to meet our cash
obligations. Over 96% of our resident fee revenues are generated from private pay residents with
less than 4% of our resident fee revenues coming from reimbursement programs such as Medicare and
Medicaid. The primary use of our cash is for operating costs, which includes debt service and lease
payments and capital expenditures. We currently estimate that our existing cash flows from
operations, together with existing working capital, asset sales and the credit facility we recently
entered into will be sufficient to fund our short-term liquidity needs. In addition to normal
recurring capital expenditures, we expect to spend
approximately $14.3 million for major improvements at the six Fortress CCRC Portfolio
facilities and several existing Alterra facilities that we own. The source of these funds is the
prior sale of two Fortress CCRC facilities for $11.5 million in the aggregate, before closing
29
costs, during the third quarter of 2005, cash on hand and cash generated from operations and
financings. There can be no assurance that financing or refinancing will be available to us or
available on acceptable terms.
We expect to fund the growth of our business through cash flows from operations and cash flows
from financing activities, such as equity offerings, and through the incurrence of additional
indebtedness or leasing arrangements. We expect to assess our financing alternatives periodically
and access the capital markets opportunistically. If our existing resources are insufficient to
satisfy our liquidity requirements, or if we enter into an acquisition or strategic arrangement
with another company, we may need to sell additional equity or debt securities. Any such sale of
additional equity securities will dilute the interests of our existing stockholders, and we cannot
be certain that additional public or private financing will be available in amounts or on terms
acceptable to us, if at all. If we are unable to obtain this additional financing, we may be
required to delay, reduce the scope of, or eliminate one or more aspects of our business
development activities, which could harm the growth of our business. At March 31, 2006, we had
approximately $94.1 million in cash and cash equivalents of which $82.9 was used to fund the April
7, 2006 acquisition of the SALI Portfolio. We may incur additional indebtedness or lease financing
to fund such acquisitions. In addition, we may incur additional indebtedness or lease financing to
fund future dividends.
Our actual liquidity and capital funding requirements depend on numerous factors, including
our operating results, our ability to acquire new facilities, general economic conditions and the
cost of capital.
Cash Flows
We had cash and cash equivalents of $94.1 million and $77.7 million at March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, respectively. These amounts exclude cash and investments-restricted and lease
security deposits totaling $69.3 million and $86.7 million, respectively, escrowed pursuant to the
terms of our indebtedness, leases, residency agreements and insurance programs. Restricted cash
amounts are generally available to pay real estate taxes and insurance premiums, reimbursements of
capital improvements and refundable tenant security deposits, and to collateralize our debt, lease
and self-insured retention obligations.
The increase in cash and cash equivalents at March 31, 2006 as compared to March 31, 2005 was
primarily due to the following:
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities for the three months ended March
31, 2006 totaled approximately $12.1 million, compared to approximately $(4.4) million for
the three months ended March 31, 2005, primarily due to recent acquisitions and decreased
facility lease expense related to the Chambrel and Omega acquisitions as these were
previously leased by us; |
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2006
totaled approximately $(186.0) million, compared to approximately $(1.8) million for the
three months ended March 31, 2005, primarily due to the 2006 purchase of two facilities in
Orlando, Florida, the Liberty Owned Portfolio and the Wellington Portfolio, additions to
property, plant and equipment and partially offset by the release of cash from cash and
investments-restricted; and |
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities for the three months ended March
31, 2006 totaled approximately $190.3 million, compared to approximately $(4.6) million
for the three months ended March 31, 2005, primarily due to the receipt of net proceeds
from debt primarily as a result of the debt incurred in connection with the purchase of
the Orlando, Florida facilities, the Liberty Owned Portfolio and the Wellington Portfolio
and draws on our credit agreement. |
New Credit Facility
On February 10, 2006, we entered into a $330.0 million credit agreement (the Credit
Agreement), consisting of a $250.0 million term loan, a $20.0 million revolving loan and a $60.0
million letters of credit commitment, with the several lenders from time to time parties thereto,
Lehman Brothers Inc., as lead arranger, LaSalle Bank National Association, as syndication agent,
Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Citicorp North America, Inc.,
and LaSalle Bank National Association, as co-
30
arrangers, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and Citicorp North America, Inc., as
co-documentation agents and Lehman Commercial Paper Inc., as administrative agent. Concurrent with
the Credit Agreement we terminated our existing line of credit.
In connection with the Credit Agreement, we and certain of our subsidiaries (the Guarantors)
made a Guarantee and Pledge Agreement (the Guarantee and Pledge Agreement) in favor of Lehman
Commercial Paper Inc., as administrative agent for the banks and other financial institutions from
time to time parties to the Credit Agreement, pursuant to which certain of the Guarantors guarantee
the prompt and complete payment and performance when due by us of our obligations under the Credit
Agreement and certain of the Guarantors pledge certain assets for the benefit of the secured
parties as collateral security for the payment and performance of our obligations under the Credit
Agreement and under the guarantee. The pledged assets include, among other things, equity
interests in certain of our subsidiaries, all related books and records and, to the extent not
otherwise included, all proceeds and products of any and all of the foregoing, all supporting
obligations in respect of any of the foregoing and all collateral security and guarantees given by
any person with respect to any of the foregoing.
The term loan under the Credit Agreement and the revolving loan and the letters of credit
commitment is scheduled to expire on February 10, 2007. We have the option of requesting a
six-month extension of any or all of the maturity or expiration dates.
At our option, the term loan and the revolving loan bear interest at either (i) the greater of
(a) the prime lending rate as set forth on the British Banking Association Telerate Page 5 plus a
margin of 0.50% and (b) the Federal Funds Effective Rate plus 1/2 of 1% plus a margin of 0.50%, or
(ii) the Eurodollar rate plus a margin of 1.50%. In connection with the revolving loan and the
letters of credit commitment, we will pay a commitment fee of 0.25% per annum on the average daily
amount of undrawn funds. In connection with the term loan, we will pay a commitment fee of 0.125%
of the average daily amount of undrawn funds so long as we draw less than $150.0 million, or 0.25%
if we draw $150.0 million or more.
The proceeds of the loans under the Credit Agreement shall be used to finance a portion of
acquisitions of fee-simple and leasehold and stock ownership interests in senior housing real
estate and to pay related fees and expenses and for general corporate purposes. The letters of
credit shall be used for the purpose of securing the payment obligation of us which could properly
be paid from the proceeds of the loans.
The Credit Agreement contains typical representations and covenants for loans of this type. A
violation of any of these covenants could result in a default under the Credit Agreement, which
would result in termination of all commitments and loans under the Credit Agreement and all other
amounts owing under the Credit Agreement and other loan and lease agreements to become immediately
due and payable.
Contractual Commitments
The following table presents a summary of our material indebtedness, lease and other
contractual commitments, as of March 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2006(1) |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
($ in 000s) |
|
Contractual Obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt(2) |
|
$ |
1,147,010 |
|
|
$ |
41,952 |
|
|
$ |
136,585 |
|
|
$ |
222,404 |
|
|
$ |
114,485 |
|
|
$ |
132,024 |
|
|
$ |
499,560 |
|
Capital lease obligations(2) |
|
|
97,684 |
|
|
|
5,958 |
|
|
|
7,944 |
|
|
|
7,944 |
|
|
|
7,944 |
|
|
|
7,944 |
|
|
|
59,950 |
|
Operating
lease obligations(3) |
|
|
2,467,984 |
|
|
|
121,597 |
|
|
|
165,183 |
|
|
|
167,543 |
|
|
|
170,455 |
|
|
|
173,702 |
|
|
|
1,669,504 |
|
Purchase obligations(4) |
|
|
1,199 |
|
|
|
717 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,713,877 |
|
|
$ |
170,224 |
|
|
$ |
310,150 |
|
|
$ |
397,935 |
|
|
$ |
292,884 |
|
|
$ |
313,670 |
|
|
$ |
2,229,014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Nine months ended December 31, 2006 |
|
(2) |
|
Includes contractual interest for all fixed-rate obligations and assumes interest on variable
rate instruments at the March 31, 2006 rate. |
|
(3) |
|
Reflects future cash payments after giving effect to lease escalators and assumes payments on
variable rate instruments at the March 31, 2006 rate. |
31
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Represents minimum purchase commitments pursuant to contracts with suppliers. |
Company Indebtedness, Long-term Leases and Hedging Agreements
Indebtedness
As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, our outstanding property-specific debt was
approximately $897.8 million, and $754.3 million, respectively. The increase from December 31, 2005
to March 31, 2006 was primarily due to debt incurred to fund the acquisitions of the facilities
from Orlando Madison Ivy, the Wellington Portfolio and the Liberty Owned Portfolio and inclusion of
the debt associated with three limited partnerships consolidated pursuant to EITF 04-5 partially
offset by scheduled principal payments and repayment of debt from the proceeds of our initial
public offering.
We had an unsecured line of credit of $330.0 million at March 31, 2006, of which $60.0 million
was restricted for certain letters of credit and $20.0 million for working capital. The balance
consists of a $250.0 term loan to fund the equity portion of our acquisitions. As of March 31,
2006, we had drawn $87.0 million on the term loan and had issued $56.0 million of letters of
credit.
On March 30, 2005, we refinanced the construction loans secured by five facilities with new
construction loans in the aggregate amount of $182.0 million, bearing interest at 30-day LIBOR plus
3.05% to 5.60% (with a weighted average of 3.50%), payable in monthly installments of interest only
through the maturity of April 1, 2008. The loans can be extended for two additional one-year terms
(subject to certain performance covenants and payment of an annual extension fee of 0.25% of the
amount outstanding). Upon completion of our initial public offering, we repaid $32.0 million of
this loan that bore interest at LIBOR plus 5.60%. The remaining loan bears interest at LIBOR plus
3.05%.
We have secured our self-insured retention risk under our workers compensation and general
liability and professional liability programs and our lease security
deposits with $23.1 million and $34.9 million, respectively, of cash and letters of credit at March 31, 2006.
As of March 31, 2006, we are in compliance with the financial covenants of our outstanding
debt, including those covenants measuring facility operating income to gauge debt coverage.
Long-term Leases
We have historically financed our acquisitions and current portfolio with a combination of
mortgage financing and long-term leases. Our strategy going forward is to finance acquisitions
through traditional mortgage financing of up to 65% of the cost of a facility, with the balance in
the form of our equity. The source of equity is expected to be from current cash and cash
equivalents, cash generated from operations, lines of credit, refinancing of our existing
facilities, joint ventures or additional equity offerings.
As of March 31, 2006, we have 299 facilities under long-term leases. The leased facilities
are generally fixed rate leases with annual escalators that are either fixed or tied to the
consumer price index.
The following two leases have or had a floating-rate debt component built into the lease
payment:
We completed the acquisition of the entities that own the six properties comprising the
Chambrel Portfolio from Capstead on December 30, 2005. Prior to the acquisition, the Chambrel
portfolio lease payment was a pass through of debt service, which includes $100.8 million of
floating rate tax-exempt debt that is credit enhanced by Fannie Mae and subject to interest rate
caps at 6.0% and $18.9 million of fixed rate debt, and a stated equity return subject to annual
escalation based on the CPI.
The Brookdale Provident leases contain $109.5 million of variable rate mortgages, which
includes $80.0 million of floating-rate tax-exempt debt that is credit enhanced by Freddie Mac. The
payments under the lease are subject to interest rate caps with a weighted-average rate of 6.39%.
$24.4 million is hedged by an interest rate swap and the balance
of $5.1 million is not hedged and
matures in May 2006.
32
For the three months ended March 31, 2006, our minimum annual lease payments for our capital
and financing leases and operating leases was $2.0 million and $41.6 million, respectively. This
amount excludes the straight-line rent expense associated with our annual escalators and the
amortization of the deferred gains recognized in connection with the sale-leasebacks.
As of March 31, 2006, we are in compliance with the financial covenants of our capital and
operating leases, including those covenants measuring facility operating income to gauge debt
coverage.
Hedging
We had one interest rate swap agreement with Firstar Bank, N.A. (now doing business as US Bank
Corp.) that converted $37.3 million of its floating-rate construction debt to a fixed-rate basis of
5.19% through maturity on April 1, 2005. This interest rate swap agreement was designated as a
fair value hedge.
We had four 10-year forward interest rate swaps with LaSalle Bank, N.A. to fix $97.3 million
of future mortgage debt at 7.03%-7.325% with maturity dates ranging from August 2012 to March 2013
with a scheduled termination date of June 2006. The terms of the forward interest rate swaps
required us to pay a fixed-interest rate to the counterparties. On March 30, 2005, we terminated
our four 10-year forward interest rate swaps and incurred a termination payment of $15.8 million,
including accrued interest of $1.7 million, which was funded by cash deposited with the
counterparty and a $10.0 million unsecured loan bearing interest payable monthly at prime plus 1%
and principal payable in quarterly installments of $500 commencing July 1, 2005 and maturing March
31, 2007. The loan was repaid in November 2005 from the proceeds of our initial public offering.
In connection with the funding of $182.0 million of loans secured by five facilities on March
30, 2005, we entered into interest rate swaps for a notional amount of $182.0 million to hedge the
floating rate debt payments where we pay an average fixed rate of 4.64% and receive 30-day LIBOR
from the counterparty. The interest rate swaps are comprised of a $145.0 million notional amount
for seven years and a $37.0 million notional amount for three years. In connection with the swaps,
we originally posted approximately $2.3 million as cash collateral with the counterparty, which was
returned in March 2006, and are required to post additional cash collateral based on changes in the
fair value of the swaps. The swaps are recorded as cash flow hedges.
In connection with the purchase of the Chambrel Portfolio, we assumed interest rate caps with
an aggregate notional amount of $100.8 million, a strike price of 6.0% and a maturity date of
November/December 2007.
33
In February 2006, we entered into five-year forward interest rate swaps in the aggregate
notional amounts of $283.5 million whereby we pay an average fixed rate of 4.97% and receive 30-day
LIBOR from the counterparty. Of this amount $5.6 million was designated for existing floating rate
debt, $126.5 was designated as a hedge on the floating rate debt incurred in connection with two
Orlando facilities, Liberty owned and Wellington Portfolio
acquisitions, and $151.4 is designated
for future acquisitions of which the AEWI Portfolio with $124.5 million of floating rate debt
closed on April 28, 2006.
At
March 31, 2006, we had interest swaps with an aggregate notional amount of $653.5 million
and a fair value of $11.9 million. The average fixed rate is 4.61% with a weighted average
maturity of 5.2 years.
Impacts of Inflation
Resident fees for the facilities we own or lease and management fees from facilities we manage
for third parties are our primary source of revenue. These revenues are affected by the amount of
monthly resident fee rates and facility occupancy rates. The rates charged are highly dependent on
local market conditions and the competitive environment in which our facilities operate.
Substantially all of our independent and assisted living residency agreements allow for adjustments
in the monthly fee payable thereunder not less frequently than 12 or 13 months, or monthly,
respectively, thereby enabling us to seek increases in monthly fees due to inflation, increased
levels of care or other factors. Any pricing increase would be subject to market and competitive
conditions and could result in a decrease in occupancy in the facilities. We believe, however, that
our ability to periodically adjust the monthly fee serves to reduce the adverse affect of
inflation. In addition, employee compensation expense is a principal cost element of facility
operations and is also dependent upon local market conditions. There can be no assurance that
resident fees will increase or that costs will not increase due to inflation or other causes. At
March 31, 2006, approximately $688.1 million of our indebtedness and lease payments bore interest
at floating rates. We have mitigated $683.0 million of our exposure to floating rates by using
$502.1 million of interest rate swaps and $180.9 million of interest rate caps under our debt and
lease arrangements. Inflation, and its impact on floating interest rates, could affect the amount
of interest payments due on such debt. The balance of floating rate debt and lease exposure of
$5.1 million matures May 2006.
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of our financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States, or GAAP, requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect our
reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses. We consider an accounting
estimate to be critical if it requires assumptions to be made that were uncertain at the time the
estimate was made and changes in the estimate, or different estimates that could have been
selected, could have a material impact on our combined results of operations or financial
condition. We have identified the following critical accounting policies that affect significant
estimates and judgments.
Self-Insurance Liability Accruals
We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of
our business. Although we maintain general liability and professional liability insurance policies
for our owned, leased and managed facilities under a master insurance program, our current policy
provides for deductibles of $1.0 million for each and every claim. As a result, we are effectively
self-insured for most claims. In addition, we maintain a self-insured workers compensation program
(with excess loss coverage above $0.5 million per individual claim) and a self-insured employee
medical program (with excess loss coverage above $0.2 million to $0.3 million per individual
claim). We are self-insured for amounts below these excess loss coverage amounts. We review the
adequacy of our accruals related to these liabilities on an ongoing basis, using historical claims,
actuarial valuations, third-party administrator estimates, consultants, advice from legal counsel
and industry data, and adjust accruals periodically. Estimated costs related to these self-
34
insurance programs are accrued based on known claims and projected claims incurred but not yet
reported. Subsequent changes in actual experience are monitored and estimates are updated as
information is available.
Tax Valuation Allowance
We account for income taxes under the provisions of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference
between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using tax rates in effect
for the year in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances
are established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amounts that are expected to be
realized. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, we have a valuation allowance against
deferred tax assets of approximately $46.4 million and $47.5 million, respectively. When we
determine that it is more likely than not that we will be able to realize our deferred tax assets
in the future in excess of our net recorded amount, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would
be made and reflected in either income or as an adjustment to Goodwill. This determination will be
made by considering various factors, including our expected future results, that in our judgment
will make it more likely than not that these deferred tax assets will be realized.
Lease Accounting
We determine whether to account for our leases as either operating or capital leases depending
on the underlying terms. As of March 31, 2006, we operated 299 facilities under long-term leases
with operating, capital and financing lease obligations. The determination of this classification
is complex and in certain situations requires a significant level of judgment. Our classification
criteria is based on estimates regarding the fair value of the leased facilities, minimum lease
payments, effective cost of funds, the economic life of the facility and certain other terms in the
lease agreements as stated in our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Facilities under operating leases are accounted for in our
statement of operations as lease expenses for actual rent paid plus or minus straight-line
adjustments for fixed or estimated minimum lease escalators and amortization of deferred gains. For
facilities under capital lease and lease financing obligation arrangements, a liability is
established on our balance sheet and a corresponding long-term asset is recorded. Lease payments
are allocated between principal and interest on the remaining base lease obligations and the lease
asset is depreciated over the term of the lease. In addition, we amortize leasehold improvements
purchased during the term of the lease over the shorter of their economic life or the lease term.
Sale-leaseback transactions are recorded as lease financing obligations when the transactions
include a form of continuing involvement, such as purchase options.
One of our leases provide for various additional lease payments based on changes in the
interest rates on the debt underlying the lease. All of our leases contain fixed or formula based
rent escalators. To the extent that the escalator increases are tied to a fixed index or rate,
lease payments are accounted for on a straight-line basis over the life of the lease. In addition,
we recognize all rent-free or rent holiday periods in operating leases on a straight-line basis
over the lease term, including the rent holiday period.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable are reported net of an allowance for doubtful accounts, to represent our
estimate of the amount that ultimately will be realized in cash. The allowance for doubtful
accounts was $3.0 million and $3.0 million as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005,
respectively. The adequacy of our allowance for doubtful accounts is reviewed on an ongoing basis,
using historical payment trends, write-off experience, analyses of receivable portfolios by payor
source and aging of receivables, as well as a review of specific accounts, and adjustments are made
to the allowance as necessary. Changes in legislation are not expected to have a material impact on
collections; however, changes in economic conditions could have an impact on the collection of
existing receivable balances or future allowance considerations.
Long-lived Assets and Goodwill
As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, our long-lived assets were comprised primarily of,
$1,610.6 million and $1,408.7 million, respectively, of property, plant and equipment. In
accounting for our
35
long-lived assets, other than goodwill, we apply the provisions of SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations, and SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. In
connection with our formation transactions, for financial reporting purposes we recorded the
non-controlling stockholders interest at fair value. Goodwill associated with the step-up was
allocated to the carrying value of each facility and included in our application of the provisions
of SFAS No. 142. We account for goodwill under the provisions of SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, we had $65.6 million and $65.6
million of goodwill, respectively.
In determining the allocation of the purchase price of facilities to net tangible and
identified intangible assets acquired, we make estimates of the fair value of the tangible and
intangible assets using information obtained as a result of pre-acquisition due diligence,
marketing, leasing activities and independent appraisals. We allocate a portion of the purchase
price to the value of leases acquired based on the difference between the facility valued with
existing leases adjusted to market rental rates and the facility valued as if vacant. The
determination and measurement of an impairment loss under these accounting standards requires the
significant use of judgment and estimates. The determination of fair value of these assets utilizes
cash flow projections that assume certain future revenue and cost levels, assumed cap and discount
rates based upon current market conditions and other valuation factors, all of which involve the
use of significant judgment and estimation. Future events may indicate differences from
managements current judgments and estimates, which could, in turn, result in impairment. Future
events that may result in impairment charges include increases in interest rates, which would
impact discount rates, differences in projected occupancy rates and changes in the cost structure
of existing communities.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
EITF Issue No. 04-5, General Partner Controls a Limited Partnership
In June 2005, the FASB issued EITF Issue No. 04-5, Determining Whether a General Partner, or
the General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or Similar Entity When the Limited
Partners Have Certain Rights (EITF 04-5). EITF 04-5 provides guidance in determining whether a
general partner controls a limited partnership that is not a VIE and thus should consolidate the
limited partnership. The effective date is June 29, 2005, for all new limited partnerships and
existing limited partnerships for which the partnership agreements are modified and no later than
the beginning of the first reporting period in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005 for
all other limited partnerships. We adopted EITF 04-5 effective January 1, 2006 and the impact on
our consolidated financial statements was not significant.
36
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have one joint venture with an affiliate of Northwestern Mutual Life which owns and
operates two facilities, The Heritage of Southfield, Southfield, Michigan (which includes 217
units/beds) and The Devonshire of Mt. Lebanon, Mt. Lebanon (Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania (which
includes 218 units/beds). The venture partner made a first mortgage loan to a third facility owned
by us, The Heritage at Gaines Ranch, Austin, Texas (which includes 208 units/beds) and the venture
made a mezzanine loan of $12.7 million to the entity that owns the facility. Pursuant to the terms
of the mezzanine loan, all net cash flow, including sale or refinancing proceeds, is payable to the
venture. Pursuant to the terms of the venture agreements all net cash flow, including sale or
refinancing proceeds, is distributed to the venture partner until it receives a 16% compounded
return and then net cash flow is distributed 60% to the venture partner and 40% to us. Capital
contributions, if any, are contributed 75% by the venture partner and 25% by us.
We developed and managed facilities for a third party. In addition, we indemnified the owner
for any federal or state tax liabilities associated with the
ownership of the facilities. Effective December 31, 2003, these
facilities were consolidated in our financial statements pursuant to FIN 46R. Prior to purchasing
and consolidating the facilities in our financial statements, we recorded management fees of 5% -
7% of gross revenues with respect to the facilities in our combined financial statements.
On March 1 and December 30, 2005, we purchased four and one of the five
facilities (which include 887 and 217 units/beds), respectively. Although the facilities were
consolidated effective December 31, 2003, pursuant to FIN 46R, they were not included in our
Federal and state income tax returns until we purchased them.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
A non-GAAP financial measure is generally defined as one that purports to measure historical
or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows, but excludes or includes amounts
that would not be so adjusted in the most comparable GAAP measure. In this report, we define and
use the non-GAAP financial measures Adjusted EBITDA, Cash From Facility Operations and Facility
Operating Income, as set forth below.
Adjusted EBITDA
Definition of Adjusted EBITDA
We define Adjusted EBITDA as follows:
Net income before:
|
|
|
provision (benefit) for income taxes; |
|
|
|
|
non-operating (income) loss items; |
|
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization; |
37
|
|
|
straight-line rent expense (income); |
|
|
|
|
amortization of deferred entrance fees; |
|
|
|
|
and non-cash compensation expense; |
and including:
|
|
|
entrance fee receipts and refunds. |
Managements Use of Adjusted EBITDA
We use Adjusted EBITDA to assess our overall financial and operating performance. We believe
this non-GAAP measure, as we have defined it, is helpful in identifying trends in our day-to-day
performance because the items excluded have little or no significance on our day-to-day operations.
This measure provides an assessment of controllable expenses and affords management the ability to
make decisions which are expected to facilitate meeting current financial goals as well as achieve
optimal financial performance. It provides an indicator for management to determine if adjustments
to current spending decisions are needed.
Adjusted EBITDA provides us with a measure of financial performance, independent of items that
are beyond the control of management in the short-term, such as depreciation and amortization,
straight-line rent expense (income), taxation and interest expense associated with our capital
structure. This metric measures our financial performance based on operational factors that
management can impact in the short-term, namely the cost structure or expenses of the organization.
Adjusted EBITDA is one of the metrics used by senior management and the board of directors to
review the financial performance of the business on a monthly basis. Adjusted EBITDA is also used
by research analysts and investors to evaluate the performance of and value companies in our
industry.
Limitations of Adjusted EBITDA
Adjusted EBITDA has limitations as an analytical tool. It should not be viewed in isolation
or as a substitute for GAAP measures of earnings. Material limitations in making the adjustments
to our earnings to calculate Adjusted EBITDA, and using this non-GAAP financial measure as compared
to GAAP net income (loss), include:
|
|
|
the cash portion of interest expense, income tax (benefit) provision and
non-recurring charges related to gain (loss) on sale of facilities and extinguishment
of debt activities generally represent charges (gains), which may significantly affect
our financial results; and |
|
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization, though not directly affecting our current cash
position, represent the wear and tear and/or reduction in value of our facilities,
which affects the services we provide to our residents and may be indicative of future
needs for capital expenditures. |
An investor or potential investor may find this item important in evaluating our performance,
results of operations and financial position. We use non-GAAP financial measures to supplement our
GAAP results in order to provide a more complete understanding of the factors and trends affecting
our business.
Adjusted EBITDA is not an alternative to net income, income from operations or cash flows
provided by or used in operations as calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. You should
not rely on Adjusted EBITDA as a substitute for any such GAAP financial measure. We strongly urge
you to review the reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to GAAP net income (loss), along with our
consolidated and combined financial statements included below. We also strongly urge you to not
rely on any single financial measure to evaluate our business. In addition, because Adjusted
EBITDA is not a measure of financial performance under GAAP and is susceptible to varying
calculations, the Adjusted EBITDA measure, as presented in this report, may differ from and may not
be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies.
38
The calculation of Adjusted EBITDA includes non-recurring merger and integration expenses
totaling $2.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006.
The table below shows the reconciliation of net income (loss) to Adjusted EBITDA for the three
months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006(1) (2) |
|
|
2005(1) |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,798 |
) |
Loss on discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
(2,532 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated ventures |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
Loss extinguishment of debt |
|
|
1,334 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006(1) (2) |
|
|
2005(1) |
|
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
6,849 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
Capitalized lease obligation |
|
|
2,160 |
|
|
|
2,276 |
|
Change in fair value of derivatives |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
(4,062 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
(1,052 |
) |
|
|
(696 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(3,880 |
) |
|
|
1,301 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
22,299 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
Straight-line lease expense |
|
|
5,259 |
|
|
|
6,094 |
|
Amortization of deferred gain |
|
|
(1,087 |
) |
|
|
(2,296 |
) |
Amortization of entrance fees |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Non-cash compensation expense |
|
|
3,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
Entrance fee receipts |
|
|
2,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
Entrance fee disbursements |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA |
|
$ |
26,892 |
|
|
$ |
10,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
BSL completed its formation transactions on September 30, 2005. Results prior to
that date represent the combined operations of the Predecessor entities. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes non-recurring expenses
totaling $3.0 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2006. |
Cash From Facility Operations
Definition of Cash From Facility Operations
We define Cash From Facility Operations as follows:
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities adjusted for:
|
|
|
changes in operating assets and liabilities; |
|
|
|
|
deferred interest and fees added to principal; |
|
|
|
|
non refundable entrance fees; |
|
|
|
|
entrance fees disbursed; |
|
|
|
|
other; and |
|
|
|
|
recurring capital expenditures. |
Recurring capital expenditures include expenditures capitalized in accordance with GAAP that
are funded from Cash From Facility Operations. Amounts excluded from recurring capital expenditures
consist primarily of unusual or non-recurring capital items and facility purchases and/or major
renovations that are funded using financing proceeds and/or proceeds from the sale of facilities
that are held for sale.
40
Managements Use of Cash From Facility Operations
We use Cash From Facility Operations to assess our overall liquidity. This measure provides
an assessment of controllable expenses and affords management the ability to make decisions which
are expected to facilitate meeting current financial and liquidity goals as well as to achieve
optimal financial performance. It provides an indicator for management to determine if adjustments
to current spending decisions are needed.
This metric measures our liquidity based on operational factors that management can impact in
the short-term, namely the cost structure or expenses of the organization. Cash From Facility
Operations is one of the metrics used by our senior management and board of directors (i) to review
our ability to service our outstanding indebtedness (including our credit facilities and long-term
leases), (ii) our ability to pay dividends to stockholders, (iii) our ability to make regular
recurring capital expenditures to maintain and improve our facilities on a period-to-period basis
and (iv) for planning purposes, including preparation of our annual budget. Our credit facility,
which we entered into on February 10, 2006 with Lehman Brothers Inc., LaSalle Bank National
Association, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., and Citicorp North America, Inc. contains a
concept similar to Cash From Facility Operations as part of a formula to calculate availability of
borrowing under the credit facility. In addition, our operating leases and loan agreements
generally contain provisions requiring us to make minimum annual capital expenditures. These
agreements generally require us to escrow or spend a minimum of between $250 and $450 per unit/bed
per year. Historically, we have spent in excess of these per unit/bed amounts; however, there is
no assurance that we will have funds available to escrow or spend these per unit/bed amounts in the
future. If we do not escrow or spend the required minimum annual amounts, we would be in default
of the applicable debt or lease agreement which could trigger cross default provisions in our
outstanding indebtedness and lease arrangements.
Limitations of Cash From Facility Operations
Cash From Facility Operations has limitations as an analytical tool. It should not be viewed
in isolation or as a substitute for GAAP measures of cash flow from operations. Cash From Facility
Operations does not represent cash available for dividends or discretionary expenditures, since we
may have mandatory debt service requirements or other non-discretionary expenditures not reflected
in the measure. Material limitations in making the adjustment to our cash flow from operations to
calculate Cash From Facility Operations, and using this non-GAAP financial measure as compared to
GAAP operating cash flows, include:
|
|
the cash portion of interest expense, income tax (benefit) provision and non-recurring
charges related to gain (loss) on sale of facilities and extinguishment of debt activities
generally represent charges (gains), which may significantly affect our financial results;
and |
|
|
depreciation and amortization, though not directly affecting our current cash position,
represent the wear and tear and/or reduction in value of our facilities, which affects the
services we provide to our residents and may be indicative of future needs for capital
expenditures. |
We believe Cash From Facility Operations is useful to investors because it assists their
ability to meaningfully evaluate (1) our ability to service our outstanding indebtedness, including
our credit facilities and capital and financing leases, (2) our ability to pay dividends to
stockholders and (3) our ability to make regular recurring capital expenditures to maintain and
improve our facilities.
Cash From Facility Operations is not an alternative to cash flows provided by or used in
operations as calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. You should not rely on Cash From
Facility Operations as a substitute for any such GAAP financial measure. We strongly urge you to
review the reconciliation of Cash From Facility Operations to GAAP net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities, along with our combined financial statements included below. We also
strongly urge you to not rely on any single financial measure to evaluate our business. In
addition, because Cash From Facility Operations is not a measure of financial performance under
GAAP and is susceptible to varying calculations, the Cash From Facility Operations measure, as
presented in this report, may differ from and may not be comparable to similarly title measures
used by other companies.
41
The calculation of Cash From Facility Operations includes non-recurring merger and integration
expenses of $3.0 million the three months ended March 31, 2006.
The table below shows the reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to Cash
From Facility Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006(1) |
|
|
2005(1) |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
12,119 |
|
|
$ |
(4,428 |
) |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities |
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
6,271 |
|
Refundable entrance fees received |
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reimbursement of operating expenses |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Entrance fees disbursed |
|
|
(703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Recurring capital expenditures, net |
|
|
(2,061 |
) |
|
|
(3,428 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash From Facility Operations |
|
$ |
13,307 |
|
|
$ |
(1,585 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
BSL completed its formation transactions on September 30, 2005. Results prior to
that date represent the combined operations of the Predecessor entities. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes non-recurring expenses totaling $3.0 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2006. |
Facility Operating Income
Definition of Facility Operating Income
We define Facility Operating Income as follows:
Net income before:
|
|
|
provision (benefit) for income taxes; |
|
|
|
|
non-operating (income) loss items; |
|
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization; |
|
|
|
|
facility lease expense; |
|
|
|
|
general and administrative expense |
|
|
|
|
compensation expense; |
|
|
|
|
amortization of deferred entrance fee revenue; and |
|
|
|
|
management fees. |
Managements Use of Facility Operating Income
We use Facility Operating Income to assess our facility operating performance. We believe this
non-GAAP measure, as we have defined it, is helpful in identifying trends in our day-to-day
facility performance because the items excluded have little or no significance on our day-to-day
facility operations. This measure provides an assessment of revenue generation and expense
management and affords management the ability to make decisions which are expected to facilitate
meeting current financial goals as well as to achieve
42
optimal facility financial performance. It provides an indicator for management to determine if
adjustments to current spending decisions are needed.
Facility Operating Income provides us with a measure of facility financial performance,
independent of items that are beyond the control of management in the short-term, such as
depreciation and amortization, lease expense, taxation and interest expense associated with our
capital structure. This metric measures our facility financial performance based on operational
factors that management can impact in the short-term, namely the cost structure or expenses of the
organization. Facility Operating Income is one of the metrics used by our senior management and
board of directors to review the financial performance of the business on a monthly basis.
Facility Operating Income is also used by research analysts and investors to evaluate the
performance of and value companies in our industry by investors, lenders and lessors. In addition,
Facility Operating Income is a common measure used in the industry to value the acquisition or
sales price of facilities and is used as a measure of the returns expected to be generated by a
facility.
A number of our debt and lease agreements contain covenants measuring Facility Operating
Income to gauge debt or lease coverages. The debt or lease coverage covenants are generally
calculated as facility net operating income (defined as total operating revenue less operating
expenses, all as determined on an accrual basis in accordance with GAAP). For purposes of the
coverage calculation, the lender or lessor will further require a pro forma adjustment to facility
operating income to include a management fee (generally 4%-5% of operating revenue) and an annual
capital reserve (generally $250-$450 per unit/bed). As of March 31, 2006, we are in compliance
with the financial covenants of all of our debt and lease agreements. An investor or potential
investor may find this item important in evaluating our performance, results of operations and
financial position, particularly on a facility-by-facility basis.
Limitations of Facility Operating Income
Facility Operating Income has limitations as an analytical tool. It should not be viewed in
isolation or as a substitute for GAAP measures of earnings. Material limitations in making the
adjustments to our earnings to calculate Facility Operating Income, and using this non-GAAP
financial measure as compared to GAAP net income (loss), include:
|
|
|
interest expense, income tax (benefit) provision and non-recurring charges related to
gain (loss) on sale of facilities and extinguishment of debt activities generally
represent charges (gains), which may significantly affect our financial results; and |
|
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization, though not directly affecting our current cash position,
represent the wear and tear and/or reduction in value of our facilities, which affects the
services we provide to our residents and may be indicative of future needs for capital
expenditures. |
An investor or potential investor may find this item important in evaluating our performance,
results of operations and financial position on a facility-by-facility basis. We use non-GAAP
financial measures to supplement our GAAP results in order to provide a more complete understanding
of the factors and trends affecting our business. Facility Operating Income is not an alternative
to net income, income from operations or cash flows provided by or used in operations as calculated
and presented in accordance with GAAP. You should not rely on Facility Operating Income as a
substitute for any such GAAP financial measure. We strongly urge you to review the reconciliation
of Facility Operating Income to GAAP net income (loss), along with our combined financial
statements included below. We also strongly urge you to not rely on any single financial measure
to evaluate our business. In addition, because Facility Operating Income is not a measure of
financial performance under GAAP and is susceptible to varying calculations, the Facility Operating
Income measure, as presented in this report, may differ from and may not be comparable to similarly
titled measures used by other companies.
The table below shows the reconciliation of net income (loss) to Facility
Operating Income for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005:
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005(1) |
|
|
2005(1) |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(19,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,798 |
) |
Loss on discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
(2,532 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Equity in loss of unconsolidated ventures |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
|
|
1,334 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
11,530 |
|
|
|
6,849 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
Capitalized lease obligation |
|
|
2,160 |
|
|
|
2,276 |
|
Change in fair value of derivatives |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
(4,062 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
(1,052 |
) |
|
|
(696 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(3,880 |
) |
|
|
1,301 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
22,299 |
|
|
|
5,173 |
|
Facility lease expense |
|
|
45,734 |
|
|
|
46,502 |
|
General and administrative (including non-cash
stock compensation expense) |
|
|
21,085 |
|
|
|
11,658 |
|
Amortization of entrance fees |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Management fees |
|
|
(1,147 |
) |
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility operating income |
|
$ |
84,008 |
|
|
$ |
63,763 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
BSL completed its formation transactions on September 30, 2005. Results prior to
that date represent the combined operations of the Predecessor entities. |
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
We are subject to market risks from changes in interest rates charged on our credit facilities
used to finance acquisitions on an interim basis, floating-rate indebtedness and lease payments
subject to floating rates. The impact on earnings and the value of our long-term debt and lease
payments are subject to change as a result of movements in market rates and prices. As of March 31,
2006, we had approximately $240.5 million of long-term fixed rate debt, $591.1 million of long-term
variable rate debt, and $66.3 million of capital lease obligations. As of March 31, 2006, our total
fixed-rate debt and variable-rate debt outstanding had weighted-average interest rates of 6.98%.
We do not expect changes in interest rates to have a material effect on earnings or cash flows
since 100% of our debt and lease payments either have fixed rates or variable rates that are
subject to swap or interest agreements with major financial institutions to manage our risk.
44
The following table presents future principal payment obligations and weighted-average
interest rates as of March 31, 2006 associated with long-term debt instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected Maturity Date December 31, |
|
|
|
Rate(1) |
|
|
Total |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
Mortgage notes payable 2008 through 2012 |
|
|
5.54 |
% |
|
$ |
196,935 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
68,994 |
|
|
$ |
32,771 |
|
|
$ |
95,170 |
|
Mortgage notes payable 2005 through 2037 |
|
|
9.12 |
% |
|
|
74,588 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
71,233 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
3,258 |
|
Mortgage notes payable through 2010 |
|
|
6.615 |
% |
|
|
105,756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,401 |
|
|
|
104,355 |
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable through 2010 |
|
|
5.38 |
% |
|
|
171,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
|
|
168,522 |
|
Mortgage notes payable through 2010(3) |
|
|
7.88 |
% |
|
|
19,697 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
10,605 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
|
5,954 |
|
Notes payable |
|
|
8.14 |
% |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital and financing lease obligation |
|
|
11.83 |
% |
|
|
66,284 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,284 |
|
Mezzanine loan |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,739 |
|
Tax exempt and taxable bonds |
|
|
3.18 |
% |
|
|
100,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt |
|
|
6.98 |
% |
|
$ |
897,840 |
|
|
$ |
265 |
|
|
$ |
81,838 |
|
|
$ |
150,189 |
|
|
$ |
70,599 |
|
|
$ |
142,181 |
|
|
$ |
452,768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Variable rate debt reflected at the swapped rate. |
|
(2) |
|
Payable to the extent of all available net cash flow (as defined). |
|
(3) |
|
Debt related to consolidation of limited partnerships pursuant to EITF 04-5. |
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term
sis defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(the Exchange Act), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Our Companys disclosure
controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported accurately and on a timely basis. Based on such evaluation, our
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of March 31, 2006, our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as such
terms is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the last fiscal
quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In connection with the sale of certain facilities to Ventas Realty Limited Partnership
(Ventas) in 2004, two legal actions have been filed. The first action was filed on September 15,
2005, by current and former limited partners in 36 investing partnerships in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York captioned David T. Atkins et. al. v. Apollo
Real Estate Advisors, L.P., et al (the Action). On March 17, 2006, a third amended complaint was
filed in the Action. The third amended complaint is brought on behalf of current and former limited
partners in 14 investing partnerships. It names as defendants, among others, the Company, BLC, a
subsidiary of the Company, GFB-AS Investors, LLC (GFB-AS), a subsidiary of BLC, the general
partners of the 14 investing partnerships, which are alleged to be subsidiaries of GFB-AS, FIG, an
affiliate of our largest stockholder, and our Chief Financial Officer. The nine count third amended
complaint alleges, among other things, (i) that the defendants converted for their own use the
property of the limited partners of 11 partnerships, including through the failure to obtain
consents the plaintiffs contend were required for the sale of facilities indirectly owned by those
partnerships to Ventas; (ii) that the defendants fraudulently persuaded the limited partners of
three partnerships to give up a valuable
45
property right based upon incomplete, false and misleading statements in connection with
certain consent solicitations; (iii) that certain defendants, including GFB-AS, the general
partners, and our Chief Financial Officer, but not including the Company, BLC, or FIG, committed
mail fraud in connection with the sale of facilities indirectly owned by the 14 partnerships at
issue in the Action to Ventas; (iv) that certain defendants, including GFB-AS and our Chief
Financial Officer, but not including the Company, BLC, the general partners, or FIG, committed wire
fraud in connection with certain communications with plaintiffs in the Action and another investor
in a limited partnership; (v) that the defendants, with the exception of the Company, committed
substantive violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO); (vi)
that the defendants conspired to violate RICO; (vii) that GFB-AS and the general partners violated
the partnership agreements of the 14 investing partnerships; (viii) that GFB-AS, the general
partners, and our Chief Financial Officer breached fiduciary duties to the plaintiffs; and (ix)
that the defendants were unjustly enriched. The plaintiffs have asked for damages in excess of
$100.0 million on each of the counts described above, including treble damages for the RICO claims.
We have filed a motion to dismiss the claims, and plan to continue to vigorously defend this
Action. A putative class action lawsuit was also filed on March 22, 2006, by certain limited
partners in four of the same partnerships involved in the Action in the Court of Chancery for the
State of Delaware captioned Edith Zimmerman et al. v. GFB-AS Investors, LLC and Brookdale Living
Communities, Inc. (the Second Action). The putative class in the Second Action consists only of
those limited partners in the four investing partnerships who are not plaintiffs in the Action. The
Second Action names as defendants BLC and GFB-AS. The complaint alleges a claim for breach of
fiduciary duty arising out of the sale of facilities indirectly owned by the investing partnerships
to Ventas and the subsequent lease of those facilities by Ventas to subsidiaries of BLC. The
plaintiffs seek, among other relief, an accounting, damages in an unspecified amount, and
disgorgement of unspecified amounts by which the defendants were allegedly unjustly enriched. We
also intend to vigorously defend this Second Action. Because these actions are in an early stage we
cannot estimate the possible range of loss, if any.
In addition, we have been involved in litigation and claims incidental to the conduct of our
business comparable to other companies in the senior living industry. Certain claims and lawsuits
allege large damage claims and may require significant legal costs to defend and resolve.
Similarly, our industry is always subject to scrutiny by governmental regulators, which could
result in litigation related to regulatory compliance matters. As a result, we maintain insurance
policies in amounts and with the coverage and deductibles we believe are adequate, based on the
nature and risks of our business, historical experience and industry standards. We believe that the
cost of defending any pending or future litigation or challenging any pending or future regulatory
compliance matter will not have a material adverse effect on our business.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
None.
Item 2. UNREGISTERED SALE OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
None.
Item 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None.
Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
None.
Item 5. OTHER INFORMATION
(a) None.
(b) None.
46
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
2.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated March
30, 2006, by and between BLC Acquisitions, Inc., SALI Merger
Sub Inc., and Southern Assisted Living, Inc. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.10 to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K (File No. 001-32641) filed on March 31, 2006).* |
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated January 11, 2006, by and
between BLC Acquisitions, Inc., as buyer, and Health Care
Properties I, LLC; Health Care Properties IV, LLC; Health Care
Properties VI, LLC; Health Care Properties VII, LLC; Health
Care Properties VIII, LLC; Health Care Properties IX, LLC;
Health Care Properties X, LLC; Health Care Properties XI, LLC;
Health Care Properties XII, LLC; Health Care Properties XIII,
LLC; Health Care Properties XV, Ltd.; Health Care Properties
XVI, LLC; Health Care Properties XVII, Ltd.; Health Care
Properties XVIII, LLC; Health Care Properties XX, LLC; Health
Care Properties XXIII, LLC; Health Care Properties XXIV, LLC;
Health Care Properties XXV, LLC; Health Care Properties XXVII,
LLC; Cleveland Health Care Investors, LLC; and Wellington SPE,
LLC, as sellers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.12 to
the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K (File No. 001-32641)
filed on March 31, 2006).* |
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated January 12, 2006, by and
between AHC Acquisitions, Inc., as buyer, and American Senior
Living Limited Partnership; American Senior Living of Fort
Walton Beach, FL, LLC; American Senior Living of Jacksonville,
LLC; American Senior Living of Jacksonville-SNF, LLC; American
Senior Living of Titusville, FL, LLC; ASL Senior Housing, LLC;
American Senior Living of Destin, FL, LLC; and American Senior
Living of New Port Richey, FL, LLC, as sellers (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 2.13 to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K (File No. 001-32641) filed on March 31, 2006).* |
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated February 7, 2006, among PG
Santa Monica Senior Housing, LP; PC Tarzana Senior Housing,
LP; PG Chino Senior Lousing, LP; The Fairways Senior Housing,
LLC; AEW/Careage Federal Way, LLC; AEW/Careage
Bakersfield, LLC; and AEW/Careage Bakersfield SNF, LLC, as
sellers, and BLC Acquisitions, Inc., as buyer (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.14 to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K (File No. 001-32641) filed on March 31, 2006).* |
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Company (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the
Companys Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Amendment No. 2)
(No. 333-127372) filed on October 11, 2005). |
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amended and Restated By-laws of the Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Companys Registration
Statement on Form S-1 (Amendment No. 2) (No. 333-127372) filed
on October 11, 2005). |
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Form of Certificate for common stock (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Companys Registration
Statement on Form S-1 (Amendment No. 2) (No. 333-127372) filed
on October 11, 2005). |
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Stockholders Agreement, dated as of November 28, 2005, by and
among Brookdale Senior Living Inc., FIT-ALT Investor LLC,
Fortress Brookdale Acquisition LLC, Fortress Investment Trust
II and Health Partners (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
4.2 to the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K (File No.
001-32641) filed on March 31, 2006). |
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of February 10, 2006, among
Brookdale Senior Living Inc., as Borrower, the several lenders
from time to time parties thereto, Lehman Brothers Inc, as
Lead Arranger, LaSalle Bank National Association, as
Syndication Agent, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P.,
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and LaSalle Bank National
Association, as Co-Arrangers, and Lehman Commercial Paper
Inc., as Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 13, 2006). |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Guarantee and Pledge Agreement, dated as of February 10, 2006,
made by Brookdale Senior Living Inc. and certain of its
Subsidiaries in favor of Lehman Commercial Paper Inc., as
Administrative Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 to the Companys Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 13, 2006). |
|
10.3
|
|
First Amendment, Consent and Waiver
to Credit Agreement, dated May 10, 2006, among
Brookdale Senior Living Inc., as Borrower, the several banks and
other financial institutions or entities
from time to time parties thereto, Lehman Brothers Inc, as
lead arranger, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P.,
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and LaSalle Bank National
Association, as co-arrangers, LaSalle Bank National Association, as
syndication agent, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. and
Citicorp North America, Inc., as co-documentation agents and Lehman Commercial Paper
Inc., as administrative agent.* |
47
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Schedules and exhibits omitted pursuant to Item 601(b) (2) of Reg. S-K. The Company
agrees to furnish supplementally a copy of any omitted schedule to the Commission upon
request. |
48
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING INC. |
|
|
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
By: /s/ R. Stanley Young |
|
|
|
|
|
Name: R. Stanley Young |
|
|
Title: Duly authorized officer and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
Date: May 15, 2006 |
49