Ontrak, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2009 June (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
____________________________
FORM
10-Q
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
quarterly period ended June 30,
2009
Commission
File Number
001-31932
_______________________
HYTHIAM,
INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
_______________________
Delaware
|
88-0464853
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
11150
Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 1500, Los Angeles,
California 90025
(Address
of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(310)
444-4300
(Registrant's
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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 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 check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this
chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to submit and post such
files).
Yes
þ No o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company.
See definitions of ‘‘accelerated filer,” “large accelerated filer,’’ and
“smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
Large
accelerated filer o Accelerated
filer þ Non-accelerated
filer o Smaller
reporting company o
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
August 7, 2009, there were 55,163,616 shares of registrant's common
stock, $0.0001 par value, outstanding.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT
31.1
|
|||
EXHIBIT
31.2
|
|||
EXHIBIT
32.1
|
|||
EXHIBIT
32.2
|
PART I - FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
Item
1. Consolidated
Financial Statements
HYTHIAM,
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(unaudited)
(In
thousands)
|
June 30,
|
December
31,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Current
assets
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 2,859 | $ | 9,756 | ||||
Marketable
securities, at fair value
|
10,529 | 146 | ||||||
Restricted
cash
|
6 | 24 | ||||||
Receivables,
net
|
321 | 654 | ||||||
Prepaids
and other current assets
|
223 | 357 | ||||||
Current
assets of discontinued operations
|
- | 3,053 | ||||||
Total
current assets
|
13,938 | 13,990 | ||||||
Long-term
assets
|
||||||||
Property
and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of
|
||||||||
$6,345
and $5,035, respectively
|
1,300 | 2,625 | ||||||
Intangible
assets, less accumulated amortization of
|
||||||||
$1,584
and $1,250, respectively
|
2,776 | 3,257 | ||||||
Deposits
and other assets
|
215 | 318 | ||||||
Marketable
securities, at fair value
|
- | 10,072 | ||||||
Non-current
assets of discontinued operations
|
- | 1,604 | ||||||
Total
Assets
|
$ | 18,229 | $ | 31,866 | ||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
||||||||
Current
liabilities
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 2,364 | $ | 3,396 | ||||
Accrued
compensation and benefits
|
974 | 1,476 | ||||||
Other
accrued liabilities
|
1,673 | 2,082 | ||||||
Short-term
debt
|
10,874 | 9,835 | ||||||
Current
liabilities of discontinued operations
|
- | 8,675 | ||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
15,885 | 25,464 | ||||||
Long-term
liabilities
|
||||||||
Deferred
rent and other long-term liabilities
|
183 | 127 | ||||||
Warrant
liabilities
|
72 | 156 | ||||||
Capital
lease obligations
|
63 | 81 | ||||||
Non-current
liabilities of discontinued operations
|
- | 4,930 | ||||||
Total
liabilities
|
16,203 | 30,758 | ||||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
||||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
||||||||
Preferred
stock, $.0001 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized;
|
||||||||
no
shares issued and outstanding
|
- | - | ||||||
Common
stock, $.0001 par value; 200,000,000 shares authorized;
|
||||||||
55,163,616
and 54,965,000 shares issued and outstanding
|
||||||||
at
June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively
|
6 | 6 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in-capital
|
177,058 | 174,721 | ||||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
453 | - | ||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(175,491 | ) | (173,619 | ) | ||||
Total
Stockholders' Equity
|
2,026 | 1,108 | ||||||
Total
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
|
$ | 18,229 | $ | 31,866 |
See
accompanying notes to the financial statements.
HYTHIAM, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
(unaudited)
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Revenues
|
||||||||||||||||
Healthcare
services
|
$ | 371 | $ | 2,031 | $ | 1,078 | $ | 4,037 | ||||||||
Total
revenues
|
371 | 2,031 | 1,078 | 4,037 | ||||||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of healthcare services
|
161 | 524 | 434 | 1,005 | ||||||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
4,526 | 8,961 | 10,129 | 20,115 | ||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
- | 915 | - | 2,273 | ||||||||||||
Impairment
losses
|
- | - | 1,113 | - | ||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
302 | 446 | 706 | 909 | ||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
4,989 | 10,846 | 12,382 | 24,302 | ||||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
(4,618 | ) | (8,815 | ) | (11,304 | ) | (20,265 | ) | ||||||||
Interest
& other income
|
77 | 196 | 123 | 625 | ||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(370 | ) | (247 | ) | (778 | ) | (512 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | - | (276 | ) | - | |||||||||||
Other
than temporary impairment of marketable securities
|
(28 | ) | - | (160 | ) | - | ||||||||||
Change
in fair value of warrant liabilities
|
15 | (1,312 | ) | 84 | 955 | |||||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before provision
|
||||||||||||||||
for
income taxes
|
(4,924 | ) | (10,178 | ) | (12,311 | ) | (19,197 | ) | ||||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
2 | 7 | 10 | 17 | ||||||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
$ | (4,926 | ) | $ | (10,185 | ) | $ | (12,321 | ) | $ | (19,214 | ) | ||||
Discontinued
Operations:
|
||||||||||||||||
Results
of discontinued operations, net of tax
|
- | (3,908 | ) | 10,449 | (5,590 | ) | ||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (4,926 | ) | $ | (14,093 | ) | $ | (1,872 | ) | $ | (24,804 | ) | ||||
Basic
and diluted net income (loss) per share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$ | (0.09 | ) | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | (0.22 | ) | $ | (0.36 | ) | ||||
Discontinued
operations
|
- | (0.07 | ) | 0.19 | (0.10 | ) | ||||||||||
Net
loss per share
|
$ | (0.09 | ) | $ | (0.26 | ) | $ | (0.03 | ) | $ | (0.46 | ) | ||||
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding
|
55,155 | 54,440 | 55,115 | 54,403 |
See
accompanying notes to the financial statements.
HYTHIAM, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(unaudited)
Six Months Ended
|
||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Operating
activities
|
||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (1,872 | ) | $ | (24,804 | ) | ||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
||||||||
(Income)
loss from Discontinued Operations
|
(10,449 | ) | 5,590 | |||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
706 | 909 | ||||||
Amortization
of debt discount and isuance costs included in interest
expense
|
805 | 260 | ||||||
Other
than temporary impairment on marketable securities
|
160 | - | ||||||
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
491 | 248 | ||||||
Deferred
rent
|
26 | (175 | ) | |||||
Share-based
compensation expense
|
2,459 | 4,163 | ||||||
Loss
on debt extinguishment
|
276 | - | ||||||
Fair
value adjustment on warrant liability
|
(84 | ) | (955 | ) | ||||
Impairment
losses
|
1,113 | 358 | ||||||
Changes
in current assets and liabilities, net of business
acquired:
|
||||||||
Receivables
|
(66 | ) | (102 | ) | ||||
I/C
with CompCare
|
- | (72 | ) | |||||
Prepaids
and other current assets
|
66 | 895 | ||||||
Accounts
payable
|
(1,970 | ) | (22 | ) | ||||
Long
term accrued liabilities
|
51 | - | ||||||
Net
cash used in operating activities of continuing operations
|
(8,288 | ) | (13,707 | ) | ||||
Net
cash used in operating activities of discontinued
operations
|
(1,103 | ) | (5,027 | ) | ||||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(9,391 | ) | (18,734 | ) | ||||
Investing
activities
|
||||||||
Purchases
of marketable securities
|
$ | - | $ | (46,520 | ) | |||
Proceeds
from sales and maturities of marketable securities
|
- | 61,384 | ||||||
Proceeds
from sales of property and equipment
|
2 | - | ||||||
Proceeds
from disposition of CompCare
|
1,500 | - | ||||||
Restricted
cash
|
- | (47 | ) | |||||
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
(17 | ) | (698 | ) | ||||
Deposits
and other assets
|
(281 | ) | 139 | |||||
Cost
of intangibles
|
- | (132 | ) | |||||
Net
cash provided by investing activities by continuing
operations
|
1,204 | 14,126 | ||||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities by discontinued
operations
|
39 | (21 | ) | |||||
Net
cash provided by investing activities
|
1,243 | 14,105 | ||||||
Financing
activities
|
||||||||
Cost
related to issuance of debt and warrants
|
$ | - | $ | (41 | ) | |||
Proceeds
from drawdown on UBS line of credit
|
1,663 | - | ||||||
Paydown
on Short-Term Debt
|
(1,429 | ) | - | |||||
Capital
lease obligations
|
(47 | ) | (71 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities by continuing
operations
|
187 | (112 | ) | |||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities by discontinued
operations
|
(73 | ) | 5 | |||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
114 | (107 | ) |
(continued on next page)
HYTHIAM,
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(unaudited)
(continued)
Six Months Ended
|
||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents for continuing
operations
|
(6,897 | ) | 307 | |||||
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents for discontinued
operations
|
(1,137 | ) | (5,043 | ) | ||||
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
(8,034 | ) | (4,736 | ) | ||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
10,893 | 11,149 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 2,859 | $ | 6,413 | ||||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash paid
|
||||||||
Interest
|
$ | 144 | $ | 292 | ||||
Income
taxes
|
30 | 3 | ||||||
Supplemental
disclosure of non-cash activity
|
||||||||
Common
stock, options and warrants issued for outside services
|
189 | 471 | ||||||
Property
and equipment acquired through capital leases and other
|
||||||||
financing
|
- | 6 |
See
accompanying notes to the financial statements.
Hythiam, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(unaudited)
Note
1. Basis of Consolidation, Presentation and Going
Concern
The
accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements for
Hythiam, Inc. (referred to herein as the Company, Hythiam, we, us or our) and
our subsidiaries have been prepared in accordance with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) rules for interim financial information and do not
include all information and notes required for complete financial statements. In
our opinion, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals,
considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Interim results
are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the
entire fiscal year. The accompanying financial information should be read in
conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto in our most
recent Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, from which the December 31, 2008 balance
sheet has been derived.
Our
financial statements have been prepared on the basis that we will continue as a
going concern. We have incurred significant operating losses and negative cash
flows from operations since our inception. As of June 30, 2009, these conditions
raised substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern. At
June 30, 2009, cash, cash equivalents and current marketable securities amounted
to $3.0 million and we had a working capital deficit of approximately $1.9
million. Our working capital deficit is impacted by $10.4 million of
auction-rate securities (ARS) that are currently illiquid. During the three and
six months ended June 30, 2009, our cash and cash equivalents used in operating
activities amounted to $3.1 million and $9.4 million, respectively.
Our
ability to fund our ongoing operations and continue as a going concern is
dependent on raising additional capital, signing and generating revenue from new
contracts for our Catasys managed care programs and the success of management’s
plans to increase revenue and continue to decrease expenses. In the fourth
quarter of 2008, management took actions that we expect will result in
reducing annual operating expenses by $10.2 million compared to the third
quarter of 2008 and we took further actions in the first and second quarters of
2009 that resulted in additional annual savings of approximately $4.5 million.
In addition, management currently has plans for additional cost reductions from
the elimination of certain positions in our licensee and managed treatment
center operations and related corporate staff and a reduction in certain
payroll, support and occupancy costs, consulting and other outside services if
required. Certain of these reductions have already been implemented as of the
reporting date, resulting in additional estimated annual reductions in operating
expenses totaling $1.2 million. Also, we have renegotiated certain leasing and
vendor agreements to obtain more favorable pricing and to restructure payment
terms. We have also negotiated and plan to negotiate more favorable payment
terms with vendors, which include negotiating settlements for outstanding
liabilities. We have exited certain markets in our licensee operations that
management has determined will not provide short-term profitability. We may exit
additional markets in our licensee operations and further curtail or restructure
our company managed treatment center to reduce costs or if management determines
that those markets will not provide short-term profitability. We do not expect
the cost impact of such actions to be material. Additionally, we are pursuing
new Catasys contracts and additional capital. As of July 31, 2009, we had net
cash on hand of approximately $2.0 million. Excluding short-term debt and
non-current accrued liability payments, our current plans call for expending
cash at a rate of approximately $650,000 per month. At presently anticipated
rates, which do not include management’s plans for additional cost reductions,
we will need to obtain additional funds within two to three months to avoid
drastically curtailing or ceasing our operations. We are currently in
discussions with third parties regarding financing. There can be no assurance
that we will be successful in our efforts to generate, increase, or maintain
revenue; or raise necessary funds on acceptable terms or at all, and we may not
be able to offset this by sufficient reductions in expenses and increases in
revenue. If this occurs, we may be unable to meet our cash obligations as they
become due and we may be required to further delay or reduce operating expenses
and curtail our operations, which would have a material adverse effect on us, or
we may be unable to continue as a going concern. This has
raised substantial doubts from our auditors as to our ability to continue
as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments
relating to the recoverability of the carrying amount of the recorded assets or
the amount of liabilities that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.
Pursuant
to a Stock Purchase Agreement between WoodCliff (our wholly-owned subsidiary)
and Core Corporate Consulting Group, Inc., dated January 14, 2009, and effective
as of January 20, 2009, we have disposed of our entire interest in our
controlled subsidiary, Comprehensive Care Corporation (CompCare), consisting of
14,400 shares of Class A Series Preferred Stock, and 1,739,130 shares of common
stock of CompCare held by Woodcliff, for aggregate gross proceeds of $1.5
million. We did not present CompCare as “held for sale” at December 31, 2008
since all of the criteria specified by SFAS 144, Accounting for the impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (SFAS 144), had not been met as of that
date. The financial statements and footnotes present the operations, assets,
liabilities and cash flows of CompCare as a discontinued operation. See Note 5,
Discontinued
Operations, for further discussion.
Based on
the provisions of the management services agreement (MSA) between us and our
managed professional medical corporation, we have determined that it constitutes
a variable interest entity, and that we are the primary beneficiary as defined
in Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities, an
Interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 (FIN 46R). Accordingly, we are
required to consolidate the revenue and expenses of our managed professional
medical corporation. See Note 2 under the header Management Service Agreements
for more discussion.
All
intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Certain amounts in the consolidated financial statements for the same periods in
2008 have been reclassified to conform to the presentation for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009.
Note
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Revenue
Recognition
Our
healthcare services revenues to date have been primarily derived from licensing
our PROMETA Treatment Program and providing administrative services to
hospitals, treatment facilities and other healthcare providers, and from
revenues generated by our managed treatment centers. We record revenues earned
based on the terms of our licensing and management contracts, which requires the
use of judgment, including the assessment of the collectability of receivables.
Licensing agreements typically provide for a fixed fee on a per-patient basis,
payable to us following the providers’ commencement of the use of our program to
treat patients. For revenue recognition purposes, we treat the program licensing
and related administrative services as one unit of accounting. We record the
fees owed to us under the terms of the agreements at the time we have performed
substantially all required services for each use of our program, which for the
significant majority of our license agreements to date is in the period in which
the provider begins using the program for medically directed and supervised
treatment of a patient and, in other cases, is at the time that medical
treatment has been completed.
The
revenues of our managed treatment center, which we include in our
consolidated financial statements, are derived from charging fees directly to
patients for medical treatments, including the PROMETA Treatment Program.
Revenues from patients treated at the managed treatment center are recorded
based on the number of days of treatment completed during the period as a
percentage of the total number treatment days for the PROMETA Treatment Program.
Revenues relating to the continuing care portion of the PROMETA Treatment
Program are deferred and recorded over the period during which the continuing
care services are provided.
Cost
of Healthcare Services
Cost of
healthcare services represent direct costs that are incurred in connection with
licensing our treatment programs and providing administrative services in
accordance with the various technology license and services agreements, and are
associated directly with the revenue that we recognize. Consistent with our
revenue recognition policy, the costs associated with providing these services
are recognized, for a significant majority of our agreements, in the period in
which patient treatment commences, and in other cases, at the time treatment has
been completed. Such costs include royalties paid for the use of the PROMETA
Treatment Program for patients treated by all licensees, and direct labor costs,
continuing care expense, medical supplies and program medications for patients
treated at the managed treatment center.
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Our
comprehensive loss is as follows:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (4,926 | ) | $ | (14,093 | ) | $ | (1,872 | ) | $ | (24,804 | ) | ||||
Other
comprehensive income (loss):
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities available for
sale
|
27 | (210 | ) | 453 | (776 | ) | ||||||||||
Comprehensive
loss
|
$ | (4,899 | ) | $ | (14,303 | ) | $ | (1,419 | ) | $ | (25,580 | ) |
Basic
and Diluted Income (Loss) per Share
In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 128, Computation of Earnings Per
Share, basic income (loss) per share is computed by dividing the net
income (loss) to common stockholders for the period by the weighted average
number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income (loss) per
share is computed by dividing the net income (loss) for the period by the
weighted average number of common and dilutive common equivalent shares
outstanding during the period.
Common
equivalent shares, consisting of 14,242,000 and 13,393,000 of incremental common
shares as of June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, issuable upon the exercise of
stock options and warrants have been excluded from the diluted earnings per
share calculation because their effect is anti-dilutive.
Share-Based
Compensation
The
Hythiam, Inc. 2003 Stock Incentive Plan and 2008 Stock Incentive Plan (the
Plans), both as amended, provide for the issuance of up to 15 million
shares of our common stock. Incentive stock options (ISOs) under Section 422A of
the Internal Revenue Code and non-qualified options (NSOs) are authorized under
the Plans. We have granted stock options to executive officers, employees,
members of our board of directors, and certain outside consultants. The terms
and conditions upon which options become exercisable vary among grants, but
option rights expire no later than ten years from the date of grant and employee
and board of director awards generally vest over three to five years. At June
30, 2009, we had 10,059,000 vested and unvested shares outstanding and 4,138,573
shares available for future awards.
Share-based
compensation expense attributable to continuing operations amounted to $1.3 and
$2.5 million respectively for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009,
compared to $1.9 and $4.2 million respectively for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2008.
Stock
Options – Employees and Directors
We
account for all share-based payment awards made to employees and directors in
accordance with SFAS No. 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment (SFAS 123R), which requires the measurement and recognition
of compensation expense based on estimated fair values. SFAS 123R requires
companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards to employees
and directors on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The value of
the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as
expense over the requisite service periods in the consolidated statements of
operations. Prior to the adoption of SFAS 123R on January 1, 2006, we accounted
for share-based awards to employees and directors using the intrinsic value
method, in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees as allowed under SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation” (SFAS 123). Under the intrinsic value method, no share-based
compensation expense had been recognized in our consolidated statements of
operations for awards to employees and directors because the exercise price of
our stock options equaled the fair market value of the underlying stock at the
date of grant.
We
adopted SFAS 123R using the modified prospective method. Share-based
compensation expense attributable to continuing operations recognized under SFAS
123R for employees and directors for the three and six months ended June 30,
2009 amounted to $1.2 million and $2.3 million respectively, compared to $1.2
million and $3.3 million respectively for the three and six months ended June
30, 2008.
In May
2009, we re-priced 4,739,000 previously issued stock options for directors,
officers and certain employees at a price of $0.28. We accounted for the
re-pricing as a modification, in accordance with SFAS 123R, and we recognized
additional stock based compensation expense of $325,000 for the three months
ended June 30, 2009 related to the modified stock options.
Share-based
compensation expense recognized in our consolidated statements of operations for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 includes compensation
expense for share-based payment awards granted prior to, but not yet vested, as
of January 1, 2006 based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance
with the pro-forma provisions of SFAS 123, and for the share-based payment
awards granted subsequent to January 1, 2006 based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123R. For share-based awards
issued to employees and directors, share-based compensation is attributed to
expense using the straight-line single option method. Share-based compensation
expense recognized in our consolidated statements of operations for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 is based on awards ultimately
expected to vest, reduced for estimated forfeitures. SFAS 123R requires
forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in
subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those
estimates.
During
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we granted options to
employees for 225,000, 497,000, 2,125,000 and 4,152,000 shares, respectively, at
the weighted average per share exercise price of $0.28, $0.30, $2.62, and
$2.64, respectively, the fair market value of our common stock at the dates
of grants. Approximately 271,700 of the options granted in 2009 vested
immediately on the date of grant. Employee and director stock option activity
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 was
as follows:
Weighted
Avg.
|
||||||||
Shares
|
Exercise
Price
|
|||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2008
|
8,260,000 | $ | 3.07 | |||||
Three months ended
March 31, 2009
|
||||||||
Granted
|
272,000 | 0.31 | ||||||
Exercised
|
- | - | ||||||
Cancelled
|
(487,000 | ) | 2.27 | |||||
Balance,
March 31, 2009
|
8,045,000 | $ | 3.03 | |||||
Three months ended
June 30, 2009
|
||||||||
Granted
|
225,000 | 0.28 | ||||||
Exercised
|
- | - | ||||||
Cancelled
|
(167,000 | ) | 3.25 | |||||
Balance,
June 30, 2009
|
8,103,000 | $ | 2.94 |
The
estimated fair value of options granted to employees during the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 was $40,000, $94,000, $3.4 million and $6.5
million, respectively, calculated using the Black-Scholes pricing model with the
following assumptions:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
||||||
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Expected
volatility
|
72%
|
130%
|
72%
|
125-130%
|
|||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
2.28%-2.36%
|
2.98%
|
2.16%-2.36%
|
2.98-3.24%
|
|||
Weighted
average expected lives in years
|
5.0-6.0
|
5.0
|
5.0-6.0
|
5.0-6.0
|
|||
Expected
dividend
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
The
expected volatility assumptions have been based on the historical and expected
volatility of our stock, measured over a period generally commensurate with the
expected term. The weighted average expected option term for the three months
ended June 30, 2009 reflects the application of the simplified method prescribed
in SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107 (and as amended by SAB 110),
which defines the life as the average of the contractual term of the options and
the weighted average vesting period for all option tranches.
We have
elected to adopt the detailed method provided in SFAS 123R for calculating the
beginning balance of the additional paid-in capital pool (APIC pool) related to
the tax effects of employee share-based compensation, and to determine the
subsequent impact on the APIC pool and consolidated statements of cash flows of
the tax effects of employee share-based compensation awards that are outstanding
upon adoption of SFAS 123R.
As of
June 30, 2009, there was $5,730,000 of total unrecognized compensation costs
related to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the
Plan. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of
approximately 1.08 years.
Stock
Options and Warrants – Non-employees
We
account for the issuance of options and warrants for services from non-employees
in accordance with SFAS 123R by estimating the fair value of warrants issued
using the Black-Scholes pricing model. This model’s calculations include the
option or warrant exercise price, the market price of shares on grant date, the
weighted average risk-free interest rate, expected life of the option or
warrant, expected volatility of our stock and expected dividends.
For
options and warrants issued as compensation to non-employees for services that
are fully vested and non-forfeitable at the time of issuance, the estimated
value is recorded in equity and expensed when the services are performed and
benefit is received as provided by FASB Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
No. 96-18, Accounting For
Equity Instruments That Are Issued To Other Than Employees For Acquiring Or In
Conjunction With Selling Goods Or Services. For
unvested shares, the change in fair value during the period is recognized in
expense using the graded vesting method.
During
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we granted options for
60,000, 60,000, 46,000 and 85,000 shares, respectively, at the weighted average
per share exercise price of $0.52, $0.52, $2.63, and
$2.64, respectively, the fair market value of our common stock at the dates
of grants. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
share-based expense attributable to continuing operations relating to stock
options and warrants granted to non-employees was $38,000, $199,000,
$67,000 and $52,000, respectively.
Non-employee
stock option and warrant activity for the three and six months ended June 30,
2009 was as follows:
Weighted
Avg.
|
||||||||
Shares
|
Exercise
Price
|
|||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2008
|
2,095,000 | $ | 3.91 | |||||
Three months ended
March 31, 2009
|
||||||||
Granted
|
- | - | ||||||
Exercised
|
- | - | ||||||
Cancelled
|
(195,000 | ) | 6.92 | |||||
Balance,
March 31, 2009
|
1,900,000 | $ | 3.61 | |||||
Three months ended
June 30, 2009
|
||||||||
Granted
|
60,000 | 0.52 | ||||||
Exercised
|
- | - | ||||||
Cancelled
|
(20,000 | ) | 7.31 | |||||
Balance,
June 30, 2009
|
1,940,000 | $ | 3.49 |
Common
Stock
During
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we issued 79,000, 189,000
, 140,000 and 193,000 shares of common stock, respectively valued at $21,000,
$77,000, $332,000 and $ 471,000 respectively, in exchange for consulting
services. These costs are being amortized to share-based expense on a
straight-line basis over the related nine month to one year service periods. For
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, share-based expense
relating to all common stock issued for consulting services was $27,000,
$175,000, $583,000 and $794,000, respectively.
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
We have a
qualified employee stock purchase plan (ESPP), approved by our
stockholders, which allows qualified employees to participate in the
purchase of designated shares of our common stock at a price equal to 85% of the
lower of the closing price at the beginning or end of each specified stock
purchase period. During six months ended June 30, 2009, we issued 8,803 shares
of our common stock pursuant to the ESPP and and no expense was incurred for
this period. Share-based expense relating to the ESPP discount price was $1,000
and $2,000 respectively for the three and six months ended June 30,
2008.
Income
Taxes
We
account for income taxes using the liability method in accordance with SFAS No.
109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. To date, no current income tax liability has been recorded
due to our accumulated net losses. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
recognized for temporary differences between the financial statement carrying
amount of assets and liabilities and the amounts that are reported in the tax
return. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recorded on a net basis;
however, our net deferred tax assets have been fully reserved by a valuation
allowance due to the uncertainty of our ability to realize future taxable income
and to recover our net deferred tax assets.
We
account for uncertain tax positions in accordance with FASB issued
Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes (FIN 48), which clarifies
the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. FIN 48 requires that companies
recognize in the consolidated financial statements the impact of a tax position,
if that position is more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on
the technical merits of the position. FIN 48 also provides guidance on
derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in
interim periods and disclosure. To date, we have not recorded any uncertain tax
positions.
Costs
associated with streamlining our operations
In
January 2008, we streamlined our operations to increase our focus on managed
care opportunities, significantly reducing our field and regional sales
personnel and related corporate support personnel, the number of outside
consultants utilized, closing our PROMETA Center in San Francisco and lowering
overall corporate overhead costs. In April 2008, the fourth quarter of
2008, and in the first and second quarters of 2009, we took further actions to
streamline our operations and increase the focus on managed care opportunities.
The actions we took in the first and second quarters of 2009 also included
renegotiation of certain leasing and vendor agreements to obtain more favorable
pricing and to restructure payment terms with vendors, which included
negotiating settlements for outstanding liabilities, and has resulted in delays
and reductions in operating expenses. In May 2009, we terminated the MSAs with a
medical professional corporation and a managed treatment center located in
Dallas, Texas “for cause” and because the Company had fully met its funding
requirements with respect to the MSAs.
During
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we recorded $222,000,
$360,000, $1.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively, in costs associated with
actions taken to streamline our operations. These costs primarily represent
severance and related benefits. The costs incurred in 2009 also include
impairment of assets and other costs related to termination of the management
service agreements for our Dallas managed treatment center. The costs incurred
in 2008 also include costs incurred to close the San Francisco PROMETA Center.
We have accounted for these costs in accordance with SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated
with Exit or Disposal Activities (SFAS 146). SFAS 146 states that a
liability for a cost associated with an exit or disposal activity shall be
recognized and measured initially at its fair value in the period when the
liability is incurred.
Marketable
Securities
Investments
include ARS, U.S. Treasury bills, commercial paper and certificates of
deposit with maturity dates greater than three months when purchased, which are
classified as available-for-sale investments and reflected in current or
long-term assets as marketable securities at fair market value in accordance
with SFAS No. 115,
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities (SFAS
115). Unrealized gains and losses are reported in our consolidated balance
sheet within the caption entitled “Accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss)” and within comprehensive income (loss) under the caption “other
comprehensive income (loss).” Realized gains and losses and declines in value
judged to be other-than-temporary are recognized as an impairment charge in the
statement of operations on the specific identification method in the period in
which they occur.
Our
marketable securities consisted of investments with the following maturities as
of June 30, 2009 and 2008:
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
Fair
Market
|
Less
than
|
More
than
|
||||||||
Value
|
1
Year
|
10
Years
|
|||||||||
Balance
at June 30, 2009
|
|||||||||||
Certificates
of deposit
|
$ | 164 | $ | 164 | $ | - | |||||
Variable
auction-rate securities
|
10,365 | - | 10,365 | ||||||||
Total
marketable securities
|
$ | 10,529 | $ | 164 | 10,365 | ||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
|||||||||||
Certificates
of deposit (short-term)
|
$ | 146 | $ | 146 | $ | - | |||||
Variable
auction-rate securities (long-term)
|
10,072 | - | 10,072 | ||||||||
Total
marketable securities
|
$ | 10,218 | $ | 146 | $ | 10,072 |
The
carrying value of all securities presented above approximated fair market value
at June 30, 2009 and 2008.
As of
June 30, 2009, our total investment in ARS was $11.5 million. Since February 13,
2008, auctions for these securities have failed; meaning the parties desiring to
sell securities could not be matched with an adequate number of buyers,
resulting in our having to continue to hold these securities. Although the
securities are Aaa/AAA rated and collateralized by portfolios of student loans
guaranteed by the U.S. government, based on current market conditions it is
likely that auctions will continue to be unsuccessful in the short-term,
limiting the liquidity of these investments until the auction succeeds, the
issuer calls the securities, or they mature. The remaining maturity periods
range from nineteen to thirty-eight years. As a result, our ability to liquidate
our investment and fully recover the carrying value of our investment in the
near term may be limited or not exist.
In
October 2008, UBS made a rights offering to its clients, pursuant to which we
are entitled to sell to UBS all auction-rate securities held by us in our UBS
account. The rights offering permits us to require UBS to purchase our ARS for a
price equal to original par value plus any accrued but unpaid interest beginning
on June 30, 2010 and ending on July 2, 2012 if the securities are not
earlier redeemed or sold. Because of our ability to sell the ARS under the UBS
rights offering, the ARS investments have been classified in current assets at
June 30, 2009. See discussions below under the heading Fair Value Measurements for
our valuation methods and impairment assessment process.
Fair
Value Measurements
Effective
January 1, 2008, we adopted SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements,
(SFAS 157). SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value measurements;
rather, it defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value
in accordance with existing generally accepted accounting principles and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. In February 2008, FASB Staff Position
(FSP) FAS 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, was issued, which delayed
the effective date of SFAS 157 to fiscal years and interim periods within
those fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008 for non-financial
assets and non-financial liabilities, except for items that are recognized or
disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at
least annually). We elected to defer the adoption of the standard for these
non-financial assets and liabilities, and adopted the deferred provisions of the
standard effective January 1, 2009, with no significant effect. In October 2008,
FSP FAS 157-3, Fair Value
Measurements (FSP FAS 157-3), was issued, which clarifies the application
of SFAS 157 in an inactive market and provides an example to demonstrate how the
fair value of a financial asset is determined when the market for that financial
asset is inactive. FSP FAS 157-3 was effective upon issuance, including prior
periods
for which
financial statements had not been issued. The adoption of SFAS 157 for our
financial assets and liabilities and FSP FAS 157-3 did not have an impact on our
financial position or operating results. Beginning January 1, 2008, assets
and liabilities recorded at fair value in the consolidated balance sheets are
categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to
measure their fair value. Level inputs, as defined by SFAS 157, are as
follows:
Level Input:
|
Input
Definition:
|
|
Level
I
|
Inputs
are unadjusted, quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in
active markets at the measurement date.
|
|
Level
II
|
Inputs,
other than quoted prices included in Level I, that are observable for the
asset or liability through corroboration with market data at the
measurement date.
|
|
Level
III
|
Unobservable
inputs that reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants
would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement
date.
|
The
following table summarizes fair value measurements by level at June 30, 2009 for
assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
Level
I
|
Level
II
|
Level
III
|
Total
|
||||||||||
Certificates
of deposit (1)
|
$ | 164 | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 164 | ||||||
Variable
auction-rate securities
|
- | - | 10,365 | 10,365 | ||||||||||
Certificates
of deposit (2)
|
133 | - | - | 133 | ||||||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 297 | $ | - | $ | 10,365 | $ | 10,662 | ||||||
Warrant
liabilities
|
$ | - | $ | 72 | $ | - | $ | 72 | ||||||
Total
liabilities
|
$ | - | $ | 72 | $ | - | $ | 72 | ||||||
(1)
included in marktable securities on our consolidated balance
sheets
|
||||||||||||||
(2)
included in deposits and other assets on our consolidated balance
sheets
|
Liabilities
measured at market value on a recurring basis include warrant liabilities
resulting from recent debt and equity financing. In accordance with EITF
00-19, Accounting for
Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a
Company’s Own Stock (EITF 00-19), the warrant liabilities are being
marked to market each quarter-end until they are completely settled. The
warrants are valued using the Black-Scholes method, using assumptions consistent
with our application of SFAS 123R. See Warrant Liabilities
below.
All of
our assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant Level
III inputs as of June 30, 2009 were ARS. See discussion above in Marketable Securities for
additional information on our ARS, including a description of the securities, a
discussion of the uncertainties relating to their liquidity and our accounting
treatment under SFAS 115. The following table summarizes our fair value
measurements using significant Level III inputs, and changes therein, for the
six months ended June 30, 2009:
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
Level
III
|
|||
Balance
as of December 31, 2008
|
$ | 10,072 | ||
Transfers
in/out of Level III
|
- | |||
Purchases
and sales, net
|
- | |||
Net
unrealized gains (losses)
|
453 | |||
Net
realized gains (losses)*
|
(160 | ) | ||
Balance
as of June 30, 2009
|
$ | 10,365 | ||
*
Reflects other-than-temporary loss on auction-rate
securities.
|
As
discussed above, there have been continued auction failures with our ARS
portfolio. As a result, quoted prices for our ARS did not exist as of June 30,
2009 and, accordingly, we concluded that Level 1 inputs were not available and
unobservable inputs were used. We determined that use of a valuation model was
the best available technique for measuring the fair value of our ARS portfolio
and we based our estimates of the fair value using valuation models and
methodologies that utilize an income-based approach to estimate the price that
would be received to sell our securities in an orderly transaction between
market participants. The estimated price was derived as the present value of
expected cash flows over an estimated period of illiquidity, using a risk
adjusted discount rate that was based on the credit risk and liquidity risk of
the securities.
In making
our determination whether losses are considered to be “other-than-temporary”
declines in value, we consider the following factors at each quarter-end
reporting period:
●
|
How
long and by how much the fair value of the ARS securities have been below
cost
|
●
|
The
financial condition of the issuers
|
●
|
Any
downgrades of the securities by rating
agencies
|
●
|
Default
on interest or other terms
|
●
|
Whether
it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the ARS before
the recover in value
|
In
accordance with FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, other-than-temporary declines in
value are reflected as a non-operating expense in our Consolidated Statement of
Operations because it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell
the ARS before the recover in value, whereas subsequent increases in value are
reflected in Stockholders’ Equity on our Consolidated Balance
sheet.
Based on
the valuation models and methodologies, and consideration of other factors, for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, we recognized approximately
$28,000 and $160,000, respectively, in other-than-temporary decline in value
related to our investment in certain ARS. We also recognized temporary increases
in value of approximately $27,000 and $453,000 related to our investment in
certain other ARS for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively. While our valuation model was based on both Level II (credit
quality and interest rates) and Level III inputs, we determined that the Level
III inputs were the most significant to the overall fair value measurement,
particularly the estimates of risk adjusted discount rates and estimated periods
of illiquidity.
These
securities will continue to be analyzed each reporting period for
other-than-temporary impairment factors. We may be required to adjust the
carrying value of these investments through an impairment charge if any loss is
considered to be other than temporary. If our efforts to raise additional
capital discussed in Note 1 are successful, we believe that we will not require
access to the underlying ARS prior to June 2010.
Fair
Value Information about Financial Instruments Not Measured at Fair
Value
FASB
Statement 107, Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments requires disclosure of fair
value information about certain financial instruments for which it is practical
to estimate that value. The carrying amounts reported in our balance sheet for
cash, cash equivalents, marketable securities, accounts receivable, notes
receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate fair value
because of the immediate or short-term maturity of these financial instruments.
The carrying values of our outstanding short and long-term debt were $10.9
million and $12.2 million and the fair values were $10.5 million and $10.7
million as of June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. Considerable
judgment is required to develop estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the
estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts we could realize in a
current market exchange. The use of different market assumptions and/or
estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair value
amounts.
Intangible
Assets
As of
June 30, 2009, the gross and net carrying amounts of intangible assets that are
subject to amortization are as follows:
Gross
|
Amortization
|
||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
Carrying
|
Accumulated
|
Net
|
Period
|
|||||||||
Amount
|
Amortization
|
Balance
|
(in
years)
|
||||||||||
Intellectual
property
|
$ | 4,360 | $ | (1,584 | ) | $ | 2,776 |
12-18
|
During
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 we did not acquire any new
intangible assets and at June 30, 2009, all of our intangible assets consisted
of intellectual property, which is not subject to renewal or extension. In
accordance with SFAS 144,
Accounting for the impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (SFAS
144), we performed an impairment test on intellectual property as of March 31,
2009 and after considering numerous factors, including a valuation of the
intellectual property by an independent third party, we determined that the
carrying value of certain intangible assets was not recoverable and exceeded the
fair value and we recorded an impairment charge totaling $355,000 for these
assets as of March 31, 2009. These charges included $122,000 for intangible
assets related to our managed treatment center in Dallas and $233,000 related to
intellectual property for additional indications for the use of the PROMETA
Treatment Program that is currently non-revenue generating. In its valuation,
the independent third-party valuation firm relied on the “relief from royalty”
method, as this method was deemed to be most relevant to the intellectual
property assets of the Company. We determined that the estimated useful lives of
the remaining intellectual property properly reflected the current remaining
economic useful lives of the assets. We also performed an impairment test on
intellectual property as of June 30, 2009 and determined that no additional
impairment charge was necessary.
Estimated
remaining amortization expense for intangible assets for the current year and
each of the next five years ending December 31 is as follows:
(In
thousands)
|
|||
Year
|
Amount
|
||
2009
|
$ | 116 | |
2010
|
$ | 233 | |
2011
|
$ | 233 | |
2012
|
$ | 233 | |
2013
|
$ | 233 |
Property
and Equipment
Property
and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Additions and
improvements to property and equipment are capitalized at cost. Expenditures for
maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is
computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
related assets, which range from two to seven years for furniture and equipment.
Leasehold improvements are amortized over the lesser of the estimated useful
lives of the assets or the related lease term, which is typically five to seven
years.
During
the three months ended March 31, 2009, we performed an impairment test on all
property and equipment, including capitalized software related to our Catasys
segment. As a result of this testing, we determined that the carrying value of
this asset was not recoverable and exceeded its fair value and we wrote off the
$758,000 net book value of this software as of March 31, 2009. This impairment
charge was recognized in operating expenses in our consolidated statements of
operations in accordance with SFAS 144. We also performed an impairment test on
all property and equipment as of June 30, 3009 and determined that no additional
impairment charge was necessary.
Variable
Interest Entities
Generally,
an entity is subject to FIN 46R and is called a Variable Interest Entity (VIE)
if it has (a) equity that is insufficient to permit the entity to finance its
activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties,
or (b) equity investors that cannot make significant decisions about the
entity’s operations, or that do not absorb the expected losses or receive the
expected returns of the entity. When determining whether an entity that is a
business qualifies as a VIE, we also consider whether (i) we participated
significantly in the design of the entity, (ii) we provided more than half of
the total financial support to the entity, and (iii) substantially all of the
activities of the VIE either involve us or are conducted on our behalf. A VIE is
consolidated by its primary beneficiary, which is the party that absorbs or
receives a majority of the entity’s expected losses or expected residual
returns.
As
discussed under the heading
Management Services Agreements below, we have a MSA with a managed
medical corporation. Under this MSA, the equity owner of the affiliated medical
group has only a nominal equity investment at risk, and we absorb or receive a
majority of the entity’s expected losses or expected residual returns. We
participate significantly in the design of this MSA. We also agree to provide
working capital loans to allow for the medical group to pay for its obligations.
Substantially all of the activities of this managed medical corporation either
involve us or are conducted for our benefit, as evidenced by the facts that (i)
the operations of the managed medical corporation are conducted primarily using
our licensed protocols and (ii) under the MSA, we agree to provide and perform
all non-medical management and administrative services for the medical
group. Payment of our management fee is subordinate to payments of the
obligations of the medical group, and repayment of the working capital loans is
not guaranteed by the equity owner of the affiliated medical group or other
third party. Creditors of the managed medical corporation do not have recourse
to our general credit.
Based on
the design and provisions of these MSA and the working capital loans provided to
the medical group, we have determined that the managed medical corporation is a
VIE, and that we are the primary beneficiary as defined in FIN 46R. Accordingly,
we are required to consolidate the revenues and expenses of the managed medical
corporation.
Management
Services Agreements
We have
executed MSAs with medical professional corporations and related treatment
centers, with terms generally ranging from five to ten years and provisions to
continue on a month-to-month basis following the initial term, unless terminated
for cause. In May 2009, we terminated the MSAs with a medical professional
corporation and a managed treatment center located in Dallas, Texas “for cause”
and because the Company had fully met its funding requirements with respect to
the MSAs. As a result, we no longer consolidate these entities as VIEs. In
connection with the termination of these MSAs, we determined that the carrying
value of certain assets was not recoverable and we recorded an impairment charge
totaling $151,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009.
Under the
remaining MSA, we license to the treatment center the right to use our
proprietary treatment programs and related trademarks and provide all required
day-to-day business management services, including, but not limited
to:
●
|
general
administrative support services;
|
●
|
information
systems;
|
●
|
recordkeeping;
|
●
|
scheduling;
|
●
|
billing
and collection;
|
●
|
marketing
and local business development; and
|
●
|
obtaining
and maintaining all federal, state and local licenses, certifications and
regulatory permits
|
The
treatment center retains the sole right and obligation to provide medical
services to its patients and to make other medically related decisions, such as
the choice of medical professionals to hire or medical equipment to acquire and
the ordering of drugs.
In
addition, we provide medical office space to the treatment center on a
non-exclusive basis, and we are responsible for all costs associated with rent
and utilities. The treatment center pays us a monthly fee equal to the aggregate
amount of (a) our costs of providing management services (including reasonable
overhead allocable to the delivery of our services and including start-up costs
such as pre-operating salaries, rent, equipment, and tenant improvements
incurred for the benefit of the medical group, provided that any capitalized
costs will be amortized over a five year period), (b) 10%-15% of the foregoing
costs, and (c) any performance bonus amount, as determined by the treatment
center at its sole discretion. The treatment center’s payment of our fee is
subordinate to payment of the treatment center’s obligations, including
physician fees and medical group employee compensation.
We have
also agreed to provide a credit facility to the treatment center to be available
as a working capital loan, with interest at the Prime Rate plus 2%. Funds are
advanced pursuant to the terms of the MSA described above. The notes are due on
demand, or upon termination of the respective MSA. At June 30, 2009, there was
one outstanding credit facility under which $8.4 million was outstanding.
Our maximum exposure to loss could exceed this amount, and cannot be quantified
as it is contingent upon the amount of losses incurred by the respective
treatment center.
Generally,
an entity is subject to FIN 46R and is called a Variable Interest Entity (VIE)
if it has (a) equity that is insufficient to permit the entity to finance its
activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties,
or (b) equity investors that cannot make significant decisions about the
entity’s operations, or that do not absorb the expected losses or receive the
expected returns of the entity. When determining whether an entity that is a
business qualifies as a VIE, we also consider whether (i) we participated
significantly in the design of the entity, (ii) we provided more than half of
the total financial support to the entity, and (iii) substantially all of the
activities of the VIE either involve us or are conducted on our behalf. A VIE is
consolidated by its primary beneficiary, which is the party that absorbs or
receives a majority of the entity’s expected losses or expected residual
returns.
Under the
MSA, the equity owner of the affiliated treatment center has only a nominal
equity investment at risk, and we absorb or receive a majority of the entity’s
expected losses or expected residual returns. We participate significantly in
the design of the MSA. We also agree to provide working capital loans to allow
for the treatment center to pay for its obligations. Substantially all of the
activities of the managed medical corporations either involve us or are
conducted for our benefit, as evidenced by the facts that (i) the operations of
the managed medical corporation are conducted primarily using our licensed
protocols and (ii) under the MSA, we agree to provide and perform all
non-medical management and administrative services for the respective the
treatment center. Payment of our management fee is subordinate to payments
of the obligations of the treatment center, and repayment of the working capital
loans is not guaranteed by the equity owner of the affiliated the treatment
center or other third party. Creditors of the managed medical corporations do
not have recourse to our general credit. Based on these facts, we have
determined that the managed medical corporations are VIEs and that we are the
primary beneficiary as defined in FIN 46R. Accordingly, we are required to
consolidate the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of the managed
treatment centers.
The
amounts and classification of assets and liabilities of the VIEs included in our
Consolidated Balance Sheets at June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008 are as
follows:
June
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 13 | $ | 274 | ||
Receivables,
net
|
9 | 281 | ||||
Prepaids
and other current assets
|
1 | 3 | ||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 23 | $ | 558 | ||
Accounts
payable
|
8 | $ | 30 | |||
Intercompany
loans
|
8,447 | 9,238 | ||||
Accrued
compensation and benefits
|
21 | 54 | ||||
Accrued
liabilities
|
4 | 13 | ||||
Total
liabilities
|
$ | 8,480 | $ | 9,335 |
Warrant
Liabilities
We have
issued warrants in connection with the registered direct placement of our common
stock in November 2007 and the amended and restated Highbridge senior secured
note in July 2008. The warrants include provisions that require us to record
them at fair value as a liability in accordance with EITF 00-19, with subsequent
changes in fair value recorded as a non-operating gain or loss in our statement
of operations. The fair value of the warrants is determined using a
Black-Scholes option pricing model, and is affected by changes in inputs to that
model including our stock price, expected stock price volatility, interest rates
and expected term.
For the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we recognized non-operating
gains/(losses) of $15,000, $84,000, ($1.3 million) and $1.0 million,
respectively, related to the revaluation of our warrant liabilities. We will
continue to re-measure the warrant liabilities at fair value each quarter-end
until they are completely settled or expire.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
Recently
Adopted
In
December 2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS 140-4 and FASB Interpretation No. (FIN)
46R-8, Disclosures by Public
Entities (Enterprises) about Transfers of Financial Assets and Interests in
Variable Interest Entities. This FSP amends FASB Statement No. 140 Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities to
require public entities to provide additional disclosures about transfers of
financial assets. It also amends FIN 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities as revised to require public enterprises to provide additional
disclosures about their involvement with VIEs. FSP FAS 140-4 and FIN 46(R)-8 are
effective for the Company's fiscal year ending December 31, 2008. We are
required to consolidate the revenues and expenses of the managed medical
corporations. The financial results of managed treatment centers are included in
our consolidated financial statements under accounting standards applicable to
VIEs, and the required disclosures regarding our involvement with VIEs are
included above under the heading Variable Interest
Entities.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), Business Combinations (SFAS
141(R)). SFAS 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations (SFAS
141), which retains the requirement that the purchase method of accounting for
acquisitions be used for all business combinations. SFAS 141(R) expands on the
disclosures previously required by SFAS 141, better defines the acquirer and the
acquisition date in a business combination, and establishes principles for
recognizing and measuring the assets acquired (including goodwill), the
liabilities assumed and any non-controlling interests in the acquired business.
SFAS 141(R) also requires an acquirer to record an adjustment to income tax
expense for changes in valuation allowances or uncertain tax positions related
to acquired businesses. SFAS 141(R) is effective for all business combinations
with an acquisition date in the first annual period following December 15,
2008; early adoption is not permitted. We adopted this statement as of January
1, 2009, and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In April
2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Assets. FSP 142-3 amends the factors that should be considered
in developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life
of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. This change is intended to improve the consistency between the
useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS No. 142 and the period
of expected cash flows used to measure the fair value of the asset under SFAS
No. 141R and other generally accepted accounting principles in the United States
(GAAP). FSP 142-3 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal
years. The requirement for determining useful lives must be applied
prospectively to intangible assets acquired after the effective date and the
disclosure requirements must be applied prospectively to all intangible assets
recognized as of, and subsequent to, the effective date. The adoption of this
statement did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of
operations, financial position or cash flows, and the required disclosures
regarding our intangible assets are included above under the heading Intangible
Assets.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements—an amendment of ARB No. 51 (SFAS
160). SFAS 160 requires that non-controlling (or minority) interests in
subsidiaries be reported in the equity section of the company's balance sheet,
rather than in a mezzanine section of the balance sheet between liabilities and
equity. SFAS 160 also changes the manner in which the net income of the
subsidiary is reported and disclosed in the controlling company's income
statement. SFAS 160 also establishes guidelines for accounting for changes in
ownership percentages and for deconsolidation. SFAS 160 is effective for
financial statements for fiscal years beginning on or after
December 1, 2008 and interim periods within those years. We adopted SFAS
160 for the fiscal year begun January 1, 2009, and it did not have a material
impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In
May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (SFAS 162). SFAS 162 identifies the sources of
accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles used in the
preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that are
presented in conformity with GAAP. SFAS 162 became effective November 15,
2008. We adopted SFAS 162 for the fiscal year begun January 1, 2009, and it did
not have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
In June
2008, the FASB ratified EITF Issue 07-5, “Determining Whether an Instrument (or
Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock” (EITF 07-5). Paragraph
11(a) of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No 133 “Accounting for
Derivatives and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS 133”) specifies that a contract that
would otherwise meet the definition of a derivative but is both (a) indexed
to the Company’s own stock and (b) classified in stockholders’ equity in
the statement of financial position would not be considered a derivative
financial instrument. EITF 07-5 provides a new two-step model to be applied in
determining whether a financial instrument or an embedded feature is indexed to
an issuer’s own stock and thus able to qualify for the SFAS 133 paragraph 11(a)
scope exception. EITF 07-5 was effective for the first annual reporting period
beginning after December 15, 2008, and early adoption was prohibited. EITF
07-5 did not have any impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
In April
2009, the FASB issued the following three FSPs intended to provide additional
application guidance and enhance disclosures regarding fair value measurements
and impairments of securities:
●
|
FSP
FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, Recognition and Presentation
of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairments;
|
●
|
FSP
FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair
Value of Financial Instruments;
and
|
●
|
FSP
FAS 157-4, Determining
Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or
Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That
Are Not Orderly
|
These
FSPs were effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after June
15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods ending after March 15, 2009.
We adopted the FSPs for the interim period ended June 30, 2009. Because we will
more likely than not be required to sell our ARS before they recover in value,
these FSPs had no impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows. See above under the headings Marketable Securities
and Fair Value
Measurements for additional disclosures required by these
FSPs.
In May
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 165, Subsequent Events. SFAS 165
establishes principles and requirements for subsequent events including (i) the
specification of the period after the balance sheet date during which management
shall evaluate events or transactions for potential recognition or disclosure in
the financial statements, (ii) the circumstances under which such events or
transactions would be recognized or disclosed, and (iii) the disclosures that an
entity shall make about such events or transactions. SFAS 165 was effective for
annual reporting periods ending after June 15, 2009. We adopted SFAS 165 for the
interim period ended June 30, 2009, and it did not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
Recently
Issued
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation
No. 46(R). SFAS 167 amends
certain requirements of FASB Interpretation 46(R), Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities, to
improve financial reporting by enterprises involved with VIEs. SFAS 167
will be effective for annual reporting periods ending after November 15, 2009.
The adoption of SFAS 167 is not expected to have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 168, The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles. SFAS 168 identifies
the sources of accounting principles and the framework for selecting the
principles used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental
entities that are presented in conformity with GAAP. SFAS 168 will be
effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after September 15,
2009. The adoption of SFAS 168 is not expected to have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
Note
3. Segment Information
We manage
and report our operations through two business segments: Behavioral Health and
Healthcare Services. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, we
revised our segments to reflect the disposal of CompCare (see Note 5, Discontinued Operations), and
to properly reflect how our segments are currently managed. Our behavioral
health managed care services segment, which had been comprised entirely of the
operations of CompCare, is now presented in discontinued operations and is not a
reportable segment. The Healthcare Services segment has been segregated into
Behavioral Health and Healthcare Services. Prior years have been restated to
reflect this revised presentation.
Behavioral
Health
Catasys’s
integrated substance dependence solution combines innovative medical and
psychosocial treatments with elements of traditional disease management and
ongoing member support to help organizations treat and manage substance
dependent populations to impact both the medical and behavioral health costs
associated with substance dependence and the related
co-morbidities.
We are
currently marketing our Catasys integrated substance dependence solutions to
managed care health plans for reimbursement on a case rate or monthly fee, which
involves educating third party payors on the disproportionately high cost of
their substance dependent population and demonstrating the potential for
improved clinical outcomes and reduced cost associated with using our Catasys
programs.
Healthcare
Services
Our
Healthcare Services segment is focused on delivering solutions for those
suffering from alcohol, cocaine, methamphetamine and other substance
dependencies by researching, developing, licensing and commercializing
innovative physiological, nutritional, and behavioral treatment programs.
Treatment with our PROMETA Treatment Programs, which integrate behavioral,
nutritional, and medical components, are available through physicians and other
licensed treatment providers who have entered into licensing agreements with us
for the use of our treatment programs. Also included in this segment is a
licensed and managed treatment center, which offers a range of addiction
treatment services, including the PROMETA Treatment Programs for dependencies on
alcohol, cocaine and methamphetamines.
Our
healthcare services segment also comprises results from international operations
in the prior periods; however, these operating segments are not separately
reported as they did not meet any of the quantitative thresholds under SFAS No.
131, Disclosures about
Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information.
We
evaluate segment performance based on total assets, revenue and income or loss
before provision for income taxes. Our assets are included within each discrete
reporting segment. In the event that any services are provided to one reporting
segment by the other, the transactions are valued at the market price. No such
services were provided during the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008. Summary financial information for our two reportable segments is as
follows:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Healthcare
services
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenues
|
$ | 371 | $ | 2,031 | $ | 1,078 | $ | 4,037 | ||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
(4,290 | ) | (8,333 | ) | (9,985 | ) | (16,080 | ) | ||||||||
Assets
*
|
18,229 | 50,205 | 18,229 | 50,205 | ||||||||||||
Behavioral
health
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenues
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
(634 | ) | (1,845 | ) | (2,326 | ) | (3,117 | ) | ||||||||
Assets
*
|
- | - | - | |||||||||||||
Consolidated
continuing operations
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenues
|
$ | 371 | $ | 2,031 | $ | 1,078 | $ | 4,037 | ||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
(4,924 | ) | (10,178 | ) | (12,311 | ) | (19,197 | ) | ||||||||
Assets
*
|
18,229 | 50,205 | 18,229 | 50,205 | ||||||||||||
*
Assets are reported as of June 30.
|
Note
4. Debt Outstanding
During
the six months ended June 30, 2009, we drew down additional proceeds under the
UBS line of credit facility, and used the proceeds to pay down the principal
balance on our senior secured note with Highbridge International LLC. We
recognized a $276,000 loss on extinguishment of debt resulting from the pay
down, which is included in our loss from continuing operations for the six
months ended June 30, 2009.
Our UBS
line of credit and our senior secured note are collateralized by the ARS, which
had a carrying value of $10.4 million at June 30, 2009 and are classified as
marketable securities in our consolidated balance sheets. The ARS are restricted
to satisfy our obligations under the UBS line of credit and the senior secured
note, under which $7.3 million and $3.6 million, respectively, was outstanding
at June 30, 2009. The
following table shows the total principal amount, related interest rates and
maturities of debt outstanding, as of June 30, 2009 and December 31,
2008:
June
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||
(dollars
in thousands, except where otherwise noted)
|
2009
|
2008
|
||
Short-term
Debt
|
||||
Senior
secured note due January, 2010; callable by the holder on July 18,
2009;
|
||||
interest
payable quarterly at prime plus 2.5% (5.75% and 7.0% at June
30,
|
||||
2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively), $3.7 million principal net of
$94,000
|
||||
unamortized
discount at June 30, 2009 and $5 million principal net of
$899,000
|
||||
unamortized
discount at December 31, 2008
|
$ 3,556
|
$ 4,101
|
||
UBS
line of credit, payable on demand, interest payable monthly at
91-day
|
||||
T-bill
rate plus 120 basis points (1.351% at June 30, 2009 and
1.675%
|
||||
at
December 31, 2008)
|
7,318
|
5,734
|
||
Total
Short-term Debt
|
$ 10,874
|
$ 9,835
|
Note
5. Discontinued Operations
On
January 20, 2009, we sold our interest in CompCare, in which we had acquired a
controlling interest in January 2007 for $1.5 million cash. The CompCare
operations are now presented as discontinued operations in accordance with SFAS
144. Prior to this sale, the assets and results of operations related to
CompCare had constituted our behavioral health managed care services segment.
See note 3, Segment
Information, for an updated discussion of our business segments after the
sale of CompCare.
We
recognized a gain of approximately $11.2 million from this sale, which is
included in income from discontinued operations in our Consolidated Statement of
Operations for the six months ended June 30, 2009. The revenues and expenses of
discontinued operations for the period January 1 through January 20, 2009 and
the three and six months ended June 30, 2008 are as follows:
Period
from
|
Three
Months
|
Six
Months
|
||||||||||
January
1 to
|
Ended
|
Ended
|
||||||||||
January
20,
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||
Behavioral
managed health care revenues
|
$ | 710 | $ | 9,582 | $ | 18,915 | ||||||
Expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Behavioral
managed health care operating expenses
|
$ | 703 | $ | 11,707 | $ | 21,446 | ||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
711 | 1,477 | 2,455 | |||||||||
Other
|
50 | 303 | 598 | |||||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations before provision
|
||||||||||||
for
income tax
|
$ | (754 | ) | $ | (3,905 | ) | $ | (5,584 | ) | |||
Provision
for income taxes
|
$ | 1 | $ | 3 | $ | 6 | ||||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
$ | (755 | ) | $ | (3,908 | ) | $ | (5,590 | ) | |||
Gain
on sale
|
$ | 11,204 | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||
Results
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
$ | 10,449 | $ | (3,908 | ) | $ | (5,590 | ) |
The
carrying amount of the assets and liabilities of discontinued operations at
December 31, 2008 and on the date of the sale were as follows:
January
20,
|
December
31,
|
||||||
(in
thousands)
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 523 | $ | 1,138 | |||
Receivables,
net
|
- | 1,580 | |||||
Notes
receivable
|
- | 17 | |||||
Prepaids
and other current assets
|
940 | 318 | |||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
230 | 235 | |||||
Goodwill,
net
|
403 | 493 | |||||
Intangible
assets, net
|
608 | 642 | |||||
Deposits
and other assets
|
230 | 234 | |||||
Total
Assets
|
$ | 2,934 | $ | 4,657 | |||
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
$ | 2,065 | $ | 1,884 | |||
Accrued
claims payable
|
5,637 | 6,791 | |||||
Long-term
debt
|
2,346 | 2,341 | |||||
Accrued
reinsurance claims payable
|
2,527 | 2,526 | |||||
Capital
lease obligations, net of current portion
|
63 | 63 | |||||
Total
Liabilities
|
$ | 12,638 | $ | 13,605 | |||
Net
liabilities of discontinued operations
|
$ | (9,704 | ) | $ | (8,948 | ) |
Item
2. Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
The
following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should
be read in conjunction with our financial statements including the related
notes, and the other financial information included in this report. For ease of
reference, “we,” “us” or “our” refer to Hythiam, Inc., our wholly-owned
subsidiaries and our managed treatment center unless otherwise
stated.
Forward-Looking
Statements
The
forward-looking comments contained in this report involve risks and
uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those discussed
here due to factors such as, among others, limited operating history, difficulty
in developing, exploiting and protecting proprietary technologies, intense
competition and substantial regulation in the healthcare industry. Additional
factors that could cause or contribute to such differences can be found in the
following discussion, as well as in the “Risks Factors” set forth in Item 1A of
Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 30, 2009.
OVERVIEW
General
We are a
healthcare services management company, providing through our Catasys™
subsidiary behavioral health management services for substance abuse to
health plans, employers and unions. Catasys is focused on offering integrated
substance dependence solutions, including medical interventions such as our
patented PROMETA® Treatment
Program, for alcoholism and stimulant dependence. The PROMETA Treatment Program,
which integrates behavioral, nutritional, and medical components, is also
available on a private-pay basis through licensed treatment providers and a
company-managed treatment center that offers the PROMETA Treatment Program, as
well as other treatments for substance dependencies.
Segment
Reporting
We
currently operate within two reportable segments: Healthcare services and
Behavioral Health. Our healthcare services segment focuses on providing
licensing, administrative and management services to licensees that administer
PROMETA and other treatment programs, including the managed treatment center
that is licensed and managed by us. Our Behavioral Health segment, through
our Catasys™
subsidiary, combines innovative medical and psychosocial treatments with
elements of traditional disease management and ongoing member support to help
organizations treat and manage substance dependent populations, and is designed
to lower both the medical and behavioral health costs associated with substance
dependence and the related co-morbidities. Currently, substantially all of
our revenue from continuing operations and substantially all of our assets are
earned or located within the United States.
Discontinued
Operations
On
January 20, 2009 we sold our entire interest in our controlled subsidiary
CompCare for aggregate gross proceeds of $1.5 million. We recognized a
gain of approximately $11.2 million from the sale of our CompCare interest,
which is included in our Consolidated Statement of Operations for the six months
ended June 30, 2009. Additionally, we entered into an administrative services
only (ASO) agreement with CompCare to provide certain administrative services
under CompCare’s National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) accreditation,
including but not limited to case management and authorization services, in
support of our newly launched specialty products and programs for autism and
ADHD.
Prior to
the sale, we reported the operations of CompCare in our behavioral health
managed care segment. For detailed information regarding the impact of the sale
of our interest in CompCare, see our consolidated balance sheets, statements of
operations, statements of cash flows and Note 5, Discontinued Operations,
included with this report.
Operations
Healthcare
Services
Licensing
Operations
Under our
licensing agreements, we provide physicians and other licensed treatment
providers access to our PROMETA Treatment Program, education and training in the
implementation and use of the licensed technology. The patient’s physician
determines the appropriateness of the use of the PROMETA Treatment Program. We
receive
a fee for
the licensed technology and related services generally on a per patient basis.
As of June 30, 2009, we had active licensing agreements with physicians,
hospitals and treatment providers for 40 sites throughout the United States,
with 23 sites contributing to revenue in 2009. We will continue to enter
into agreements on a selective basis with additional healthcare providers to
increase the availability of the PROMETA Treatment Program, generally in markets
we are presently operating or where such sites will provide support for our
Catasys products. As such revenues are generally related to the number of
patients treated, key indicators of our financial performance for the PROMETA
Treatment Program will be the number of facilities and healthcare providers that
license our technology, and the number of patients that are treated by those
providers using our PROMETA Treatment Program. As discussed below in Recent Developments, we have
reduced resources allocated to licensing activities and are currently evaluating
and considering additional actions to streamline our operations that may impact
the licensing operations.
Managed
Treatment Center
We
currently manage one treatment center under our licensing agreement, located in
Santa Monica, California (dba The Center to Overcome Addiction, formerly named the PROMETA
Center). In May 2009, we terminated the Management Services Agreements
(“MSA”) with a medical professional corporation and a managed treatment center
in Dallas, Texas. We manage the business components of the Center to Overcome
Addiction and license the PROMETA Treatment Program and use of the name in
exchange for management and licensing fees under the terms of a full business
service management agreement. This center offers treatment with the PROMETA
Treatment Program for dependencies on alcohol, cocaine and methamphetamines and
also offer medical interventions for other substance dependencies and
psychiatric services. The revenues and expenses of this center are included in
our consolidated financial statements under accounting standards applicable
to variable interest entities. Revenues from licensed and managed treatment
centers, including the Center to Overcome Addiction, accounted for approximately
59% and 56% of our healthcare services revenues for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009, respectively. As discussed below in Recent Developments, we are
currently evaluating and considering additional actions to streamline our
operations that may impact our managed treatment center.
Behavioral
Health
Beginning
in 2007, we developed our Catasys integrated substance dependence solutions for
third-party payors. We believe that our Catasys offerings will address a high
cost segment of the healthcare market for substance dependence, and we are
currently marketing our Catasys integrated substance dependence solutions to
managed care health plans on a case rate or monthly fee, which involves
educating third party payors on the disproportionately high cost of their
substance dependent population and demonstrating the potential for improved
clinical outcomes and reduced cost associated with using our Catasys programs.
In addition, we may be launching other specialty behavioral health products and
programs, including Autism and ADHD, that can leverage our existing
infrastructure and sales force, but this effort is largely on hold due to
current budget constraints.
Recent
Developments
In the
first half of 2009, we completed actions that we began in the fourth quarter of
2008 to reduce our operating expenses by an additional $10.2 million from the
third quarter 2008 expenditure level. The actions we took included significant
reductions in field and regional sales personnel and related corporate support
personnel, curtailment of our international operations, a reduction in outside
consultant expense, termination of a clinical study and overall reductions in
overhead and payroll costs. Additionally, we took further actions in the first
half of 2009 to streamline our operations and increase the focus on managed care
opportunities and to renegotiate certain leasing and vendor agreements to obtain
more favorable pricing and to restructure payment terms with vendors, which
included negotiating settlements for outstanding liabilities. In addition, we
terminated the MSAs with a medical professional corporation and a managed
treatment center in Dallas, Texas “for cause” and because the Company had met
its funding requirement with respect to such MSAs. These efforts have resulted
in delays and reductions in operating expenses, resulting in additional annual
savings in operating expenses of approximately $4.5 million.
Dr.
Anton’s study on alcohol dependent subjects, entitled “Efficacy of a Combination
of Flomazenil and Gabapenton in the Treatment of Alcohol Dependence”, was
published in the August issue of Journal of Clinical
Psychopharmacology.
How
We Measure Our Results
Our
healthcare services revenues to date have been primarily generated from fees
that we charge to hospitals, healthcare facilities and other healthcare
providers that license our PROMETA Treatment Program, and from patient service
revenues related to our licensing and MSAs with managed treatment centers. Our
technology license and MSAs usually provide for an initial fee for training and
other start-up related costs, plus a combined fee for the licensed technology
and other related services, generally set on a per-treatment basis, and thus a
substantial portion of our revenues is closely related to the number of patients
treated. Patients treated by managed treatment centers generate higher average
revenues per PROMETA patient than our other licensed sites due to consolidation
of their gross patient revenues in our financial statements. Key indicators of
our financial performance will be the number of health plans and other
organizations that contract with us for our Catasys products, the number of
managed care members enrolled in such programs, our ability to demonstrate the
cost savings of our Catasys programs,, and the number of facilities and
healthcare providers that contract with us to license our technology and the
number of patients that are treated by those providers using the PROMETA
Treatment Program. Additionally, our financial results will depend on our
ability to expand the adoption of Catasys and the PROMETA Treatment Program, and
our ability to effectively price these products, and manage general,
administrative and other operating costs.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Table
of Summary Consolidated Financial Information
The table
below and the discussion that follows summarize our results of consolidated
continuing operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Revenues
|
||||||||||||||||
Healthcare
services
|
$ | 371 | $ | 2,031 | $ | 1,078 | $ | 4,037 | ||||||||
Total
revenues
|
371 | 2,031 | 1,078 | 4,037 | ||||||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of healthcare services
|
161 | 524 | 434 | 1,005 | ||||||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
4,526 | 8,961 | 10,129 | 20,115 | ||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
- | 915 | - | 2,273 | ||||||||||||
Impairment
losses
|
- | - | 1,113 | - | ||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
302 | 446 | 706 | 909 | ||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
4,989 | 10,846 | 12,382 | 24,302 | ||||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
(4,618 | ) | (8,815 | ) | (11,304 | ) | (20,265 | ) | ||||||||
Interest
& other income
|
77 | 196 | 123 | 625 | ||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(370 | ) | (247 | ) | (778 | ) | (512 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | - | (276 | ) | - | |||||||||||
Other
than temporary impairment of marketable securities
|
(28 | ) | - | (160 | ) | - | ||||||||||
Change
in fair value of warrant liabilities
|
15 | (1,312 | ) | 84 | 955 | |||||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before provision
|
||||||||||||||||
for
income taxes
|
(4,924 | ) | (10,178 | ) | (12,311 | ) | (19,197 | ) | ||||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
2 | 7 | 10 | 17 | ||||||||||||
Loss from continuing operations | $ | (4,926 | ) | $ | (10,185 | ) | $ | (12,321 | ) | $ | (19,214 | ) |
Summary
of Consolidated Operating Results
The net
loss from continuing operations before provision for income taxes decreased by
$5.3 million and $6.9 million during the three and six month periods ended June
30, 2009, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008, primarily due to
the impact of actions to streamline our Healthcare Services operations and
focus on opportunities in our Behavioral Health business. Such actions resulted
in decreases in general & administrative expenses (excluding share-based
compensation expense and costs associated with streamlining operations) and
research and development of $2.7 million and $915,000, respectively,
for the three month period ended June 30, 2009 when compared to the same
period in 2008 and decreases of $6.4 million and $2.3 million for the six month
period ended June 30, 2009 when compared to the same period in 2008. These
decreases were partially offset by deceases in related Healthcare Services
revenue of $1.6 million and $2.9 million, respectively, for the same
comparative periods.
Results
for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2009 reflected $222,000 and
$360,000, respectively, of costs associated with actions taken to
streamline our operations, compared to $1.2 million and $2.4 million of
such costs for the same periods in 2008. Share-based compensation expense
totaled $1.3 million and $2.5 million for the three and six month periods ended
June 30, 2009, compared to $1.9 million and $4.2 million, respectively, for the
same periods in 2008. Results for the six months ended June 30,
2009 include $1.1 million of impairment losses on fixed assets and
intangible assets, a $276,000 loss on extinguishment of debt and $160,000
of other than temporary losses on marketable securities. Also, results for the
three months ended June 30, 2008 were negatively impacted by a $1.3 million
change in the fair value of warrant liabilities and results for the six months
ended June 30, 2008 were favorably impacted a $1.0 million change in such
liabilities.
Reconciliation
of Segment Results
The
following table summarizes and reconciles the loss before provision for income
taxes of our reportable segments in continuing operations to the loss for
continuing operations before provision for income taxes from our consolidated
statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Healthcare
services
|
$ | (4,290 | ) | $ | (8,780 | ) | $ | (9,985 | ) | $ | (16,543 | ) | ||||
Behavioral
health
|
(634 | ) | (1,398 | ) | (2,326 | ) | (2,654 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before provision for income
taxes
|
$ | (4,924 | ) | $ | (10,178 | ) | $ | (12,311 | ) | $ | (19,197 | ) |
Healthcare
Services
The
following table summarizes the operating results for healthcare services for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(In
thousands, except patient treatment data)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
Revenues
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
licensees
|
$ | 152 | $ | 1,164 | $ | 336 | $ | 1,987 | ||||||||
Managed
treatment centers (a)
|
219 | 424 | 608 | 1,088 | ||||||||||||
Other
revenues
|
- | 443 | 134 | 962 | ||||||||||||
Total
healthcare services revenues
|
$ | 371 | $ | 2,031 | $ | 1,078 | $ | 4,037 | ||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of healthcare services
|
$ | 161 | $ | 524 | $ | 434 | $ | 1,005 | ||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
Salaries
and benefits
|
1,608 | 3,878 | 4,384 | 10,272 | ||||||||||||
Other
expenses
|
2,284 | 3,685 | 4,260 | 7,189 | ||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
- | 915 | - | 2,273 | ||||||||||||
Impairment
losses
|
- | 447 | 355 | 447 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
302 | - | 623 | 463 | ||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
$ | 4,355 | $ | 9,449 | $ | 10,056 | $ | 21,649 | ||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
$ | (3,984 | ) | $ | (7,418 | ) | $ | (8,978 | ) | $ | (17,612 | ) | ||||
Interest
and other income
|
77 | 196 | 123 | 625 | ||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(370 | ) | (247 | ) | (778 | ) | (512 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | - | (276 | ) | - | |||||||||||
Other
than temporary impairment on
|
||||||||||||||||
marketable
securities
|
(28 | ) | - | (160 | ) | - | ||||||||||
Change
in fair value of warrant liability
|
15 | (1,311 | ) | 84 | 956 | |||||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
$ | (4,290 | ) | $ | (8,780 | ) | $ | (9,985 | ) | $ | (16,543 | ) | ||||
PROMETA
patients treated
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
licensees
|
30 | 198 | 72 | 342 | ||||||||||||
Managed
treatment centers (a)
|
19 | 31 | 56 | 84 | ||||||||||||
Other
|
- | 17 | 11 | 52 | ||||||||||||
49 | 246 | 139 | 478 | |||||||||||||
Average revenue
per patient treated (b)
|
||||||||||||||||
U.S.
licensees
|
$ | 5,067 | $ | 5,753 | $ | 4,528 | $ | 5,722 | ||||||||
Managed
treatment centers (a)
|
7,211 | 9,978 | 6,661 | 9,823 | ||||||||||||
Other
|
- | 11,390 | 12,182 | 8,407 | ||||||||||||
Overall
average
|
5,898 | 6,675 | 5,993 | 6,734 | ||||||||||||
(a)
Includes managed and/or licensed PROMETA Centers.
|
||||||||||||||||
(b)
The average revenue per patient treated excludes administrative fees and
other non-PROMETA
patient revenues.
|
Revenue
Revenue decreased
by $1.7 million and $3.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30,
2009, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008, due mainly to a
decline in licensed sites contributing to revenue and in the number of patients
treated at our U.S licensed sites and the managed treatment centers, resulting
from our decision to streamline our Healthcare Services operation by shutting
down unprofitable markets and reducing field staff. We also shut down sites in
our international operations during the first quarter of 2009. The number of
patients
treated
decreased by 80% and 71% in the three and six months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008. The number of licensed sites
that contributed to revenues decreased to 17 for the three months ended June 30,
2009, compared to 31 for the same period in 2008. The average revenue per
patient treated at U.S. licensed sites decreased during the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009 compared to the same periods in 2008 due to due to higher
average discounts granted by our licensees and the average revenue per patient
treated at the managed treatment centers increased during the three and six
months ended June 30, 2009 compared to the same periods in 2008 due to an
increase in non-PROMETA related services provided to patients. Our revenue may
be further impacted in the third quarter and fourth quarter of 2009 by market
conditions due to the uncertain economy, impacting both the number of treatments
and the average revenue per patient, and also as we maintain our commitment to
reduce operating expenses in components of healthcare services that are
revenue-generating, but unprofitable.
Cost
of Healthcare Services
Cost of
healthcare services consists of royalties we pay for the use of the PROMETA
Treatment Program, and costs incurred by our consolidated managed treatment
centers for direct labor costs for physicians and nursing staff, continuing care
expense, medical supplies and treatment program medicine costs. The decrease in
these costs primarily reflects the decrease in revenues from these treatment
centers.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General
and administrative expense included share-based compensation expense and
costs associated with streamlining our operations, which totaled $1.3 million
and $222,000, respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared
to $1.9 million and $1.2 million, respectively for the same period in 2008.
Excluding such costs, total general and administrative expense decreased by $2.0
million in 2009 when compared to 2008, due mainly to decreases in outside
services, salaries and benefits and other expenses resulting from the
continued streamlining of operations to focus on opportunities in our Behavioral
Health segment.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2009, share-based compensation expense and costs
associated with streamlining our operations totaled $2.5 million and $360,000,
respectively, compared to $4.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively for
the same period in 2008. Excluding such costs, total general and administrative
expense decreased by $5.2 million in 2009 when compared to 2008, due mainly
to decreases in outside services, salaries and benefits and other expenses
resulting from the continued streamlining of operations.
Research
and Development
Our total
research and development expenses decreased by $915,000 and $2.3 million for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009 compared to the same periods in 2008.
These decreases are attributable to clinical studies undertaken in 2008 and
prior years that were substantially completed in 2008 and for which no expense
was recognized during the three and six months ended June 30, 2009. In addition,
we agreed to terminate funding for the grant that supported the Cedar Sinai
research study on alcohol-dependent subjects as the site had been unable to
recruit patients with the desired clinical profile in a timely manner and in
light of the two additional alcohol studies that had been
completed.
Impairment
Losses
Impairment
charges for the six months ended June 30, 2009 included $122,000 for intangible
assets related to our managed treatment center in Dallas and $233,000 for
intellectual property related to additional indications for the use of the
PROMETA Treatment Program that are currently non-revenue-generating, both of
which resulted from impairment testing at March 31, 2009. No further impairment
was deemed See additional information below under the heading “Critical
Accounting Estimates -- Impairment of Intangible
Assets.”
Interest
and Other Income
Interest
and other income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 decreased by
$119,000 and $502,000, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008 due to
decreases in the invested balance of marketable securities and a decrease in
interest rates.
Interest
Expense
Interest
expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 increased by $123,000
and $266,000, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008 due to higher
debt balances from the UBS line of credit during the three and six months ended
June 30, 2009, partially offset by the effect of lower interest rates during
this same period.
Loss
from Extinguishment of Debt
We
recognized a $276,000 loss on extinguishment of debt for the six months ended
June 30, 2009 resulting from the $1.4 million pay down on the Highbridge senior
secured note in February 2009, which reflected an unamortized discount of
$208,000 and a $68,000 prepayment penalty.
Other
than Temporary Impairment on Marketable Securities
Impairment
charges of $28,000 and $160,000 related to certain of our auction-rate
securities (ARS) were recognized for the three and six months ended June 30,
2009. The charges were based on an updated valuation of the securities
performed by management as of March 31, 2009 and June 30, 2009 and were deemed
necessary after an analysis of other-than-temporary impairment factors, most
notably, the likelihood that we will be required to sell the ARS before they
recover in value.
Change
in fair value of warrant liability
Warrants
issued in connection with a registered direct stock placement completed on
November 7, 2007 and warrants issued in connection with the Highbridge note
issued on January 18, 2007 and amended on July 31, 2008, are being accounted for
as liabilities in accordance with EITF 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial
Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock
(EITF 00-19), based on an analysis of the terms and conditions of the warrant
agreement.
Both
warrants are re-valued at each reporting period using the Black-Scholes pricing
model to determine the fair market value per share. The change in fair value of
the warrants issued in connection with the November 7, 2007 registered direct
stock placement amounted to $7,000 and $33,000 for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2009, respectively. The change in fair value for the warrants
issued in connection with the Highbridge note amounted to $8,000 and $43,000 for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively. We will continue to
mark the warrants to market value each quarter end until they are completely
settled.
Behavioral
Health
The
following table summarizes the operating results for Behavioral Health for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008:
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenues
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||
Operating
Expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
||||||||||||||||
Salaries
and benefits
|
$ | 556 | $ | 658 | $ | 1,210 | $ | 1,096 | ||||||||
Other
expenses
|
78 | 740 | 275 | 1,558 | ||||||||||||
Impairment
charges
|
- | - | 758 | - | ||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
- | - | 83 | - | ||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
$ | 634 | $ | 1,398 | $ | 2,326 | $ | 2,654 | ||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
$ | (634 | ) | $ | (1,398 | ) | $ | (2,326 | ) | $ | (2,654 | ) |
General
and Administrative Expenses
Total
general and administrative expenses decreased by $764,000 in the three months
ended June 30, 2009 when compared to the same period in 2008, due mainly to a
$483,000 reduction in consulting and outside services expense, a $102,000
decrease in salaries and a $179,000 decline in other general
expenses.
Total
general and administrative expenses decreased by $1.2 million in the six months
ended June 30, 2009 when compared to the same period in 2008, due mainly to a
$899,000 reduction in consulting and outside services expense, and a $384,000
decline in other general expenses, partially offset by a $114,000 increase in
salaries and related benefits due to increased labor allocations to our
Behavioral Health segment.
Impairment
Losses
An
impairment charge of $758,000 was recognized during the six months ended June
30, 2009 related to capitalized software for our Behavioral Health segment. We
performed an impairment analysis in accordance with SFAS 144 and determined that
the carrying value was not recoverable and was fully impaired.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009 consisted of
depreciation of the capitalized software prior to the impairment discussed
above. There was no depreciation during the same periods in 2008 as the asset
had not yet been placed in service.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity
and Going Concern
As of
June 30, 2009, we had a balance of approximately $3.0 million in cash and cash
equivalents and $10.5 million of current marketable securities, of which
approximately $10.4 million are ARS, which are classified as marketable
securities in current assets as of June 30, 2009 and are discussed
below.
As of
June 30, 2009, we had a working capital deficit of approximately $1.9 million.
We have incurred significant net losses and negative operating cash flows since
our inception. We expect to continue to incur negative cash flows and net losses
for at least the next twelve months. As of June 30, 2009, these conditions
raised substantial doubt from our auditors as to our ability to continue as a
going concern. Our ability to fund our ongoing operations and continue as a
going concern is dependent on raising additional capital, signing and generating
revenue from new contracts for our Catasys managed care programs and the
success of management’s plans to increase revenue and continue to decrease
expenses. In the fourth quarter of 2008, management took actions that resulted
in reducing annual operating expenses by $10.2 million compared to the third
quarter of 2008. The actions we took included significant reductions in field
and regional sales personnel and related corporate support personnel,
curtailment of our international operations, a reduction in outside consultant
expense and overall reductions in overhead costs. Additionally, we took further
actions in the first half of 2009 to streamline our operations and increase the
focus on managed care opportunities and to renegotiate certain leasing and
vendor agreements to obtain more favorable pricing and to restructure payment
terms with vendors, which included negotiating settlements for outstanding
liabilities. The actions we took to streamline operations and related cost
reductions implemented in 2008, and the additional actions we took in the first
half of 2009, are expected to reduce our operating expenditures significantly
for 2009 compared to 2008. As discussed in Recent Developments above,
these additional efforts have resulted in delays and reductions in operating
expenses, resulting in additional annual savings in total budgeted operating
expenses of approximately $4.5 million. In addition, management currently has
plans for additional cost reductions from the elimination of certain positions
in our licensee and managed treatment center operations and related corporate
staff and a reduction in certain support and occupancy costs, consulting and
other outside services if required. Certain of these reductions have already
been implemented as of the reporting date, resulting in additional estimated
annual reductions in operating expenses totaling $1.2 million. We have exited
certain markets in our licensee operations that management has determined will
not provide short-term profitability. We may exit additional markets in our
licensee operations and further curtail or restructure our company managed
treatment center to reduce costs or if management determines that those markets
will not provide short-term profitability.
Additionally,
we are pursuing new Catasys contracts and additional capital. As of July 31,
2009, we had net cash on hand of approximately $2.0 million. Excluding
short-term debt and non-current accrued liability payments, our current plans
call for expending cash at a rate of approximately $650,000 per month. At
presently anticipated rates, which do not include management’s plans for
additional cost reductions, we will need to obtain additional funds within the
next two to three months to avoid drastically curtailing or ceasing our
operations. We are currently in discussions with third parties regarding
financing. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in our efforts
to generate, increase, or maintain revenue; or raise necessary funds on
acceptable terms or at all, and we may not be able to offset this by sufficient
reductions in expenses and increases in revenue. If this occurs, we may be
unable to meet our cash obligations as they become due and we may be required to
further delay or reduce operating expenses and curtail our operations, which
would have a material adverse effect on us, or we may be unable to continue as a
going concern.
In
October 2008, UBS made a rights offering to its clients, pursuant to which we
are entitled to sell to UBS all auction-rate securities held by us in our UBS
account. The rights offering permits us to require UBS to purchase our ARS for a
price equal to original par value plus any accrued but unpaid interest beginning
on June 30, 2010 and ending on July 2, 2012 if the securities are not
earlier redeemed or sold. As part of the rights offering, UBS provided to us a
line of credit equal to 75% of the market value of the ARS until they are
purchased by UBS. We accepted this offer in November 2008. At June 30, 2009, we
had $7.3 million of outstanding borrowing under the UBS line of credit that is
payable on demand and is secured by the ARS.We granted Highbridge additional
redemption rights in connection with the amendment of the senior secured note
that would require us to use any margin loan proceeds in excess of $5.8 million
to pay down the principal amount of the senior secured note. The line of credit
has certain restrictions described in the prospectus.
ARS are
variable-rate instruments with longer stated maturities whose interest rates are
reset at predetermined short-term intervals through a Dutch auction
system. However, commencing in February 2008, auctions for these securities
have failed, meaning the parties desiring to sell securities could not be
matched with an adequate number of buyers, resulting in our having to continue
to hold these securities. We believe that we ultimately should be able to
liquidate all of our ARS investments without significant loss because the
securities are Aaa/AAA rated and collateralized by portfolios of student loans
guaranteed by the U.S. government. However, current conditions in the ARS market
make it likely that auctions will continue to be unsuccessful in the short-term,
limiting the liquidity of these investments until the auction succeeds, the
issuer calls or refinances the securities, or they mature. As a result of the
current turmoil in the credit markets, our ability to liquidate our investment
and fully recover the carrying value of our investment in the near term may be
limited or not exist. However, because of our ability to sell the ARS under the
UBS rights offering discussed above, the ARS investments have been classified in
current assets at June 30, 2009.
Due to
our current financial condition, we have concluded that we will likely be
required to sell the ARS before we are able to recover full value for them.
Accordingly, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, we recognized
approximately $28,000 and $160,000, respectively, in other-than-temporary
decline in value related to our investment in certain ARS. We also recognized
temporary increases in value of approximately $27,000 and $453,000 related to
our investment in certain other ARS for the three and six months ended June 30,
2009, respectively, based on the estimated fair value as determined by
management. If current market conditions deteriorate further, the credit rating
of the ARS issuers deteriorates, or the anticipated recovery in the market
values does not occur, we may be required to make further adjustments to the
carrying value of the ARS through impairment charges in the Consolidated
Statement of Operations, and any such impairment adjustments may be material. In
accordance with SFAS 115, other-than-temporary declines in value are reflected
as a non-operating expense in our Consolidated Statements of Operations, whereas
subsequent temporary increases in value are reflected in Stockholders’ Equity on
our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Cash
Flows
We used
$8.3 million of cash for continuing operating activities during the six months
ended June 30, 2009. Use of funds in operating activities include general and
administrative expense, excluding share-based expense, the cost of healthcare
services revenue and research and development costs, which totaled approximately
$14.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $19.2 million
for the same period in 2008. This decrease in net cash used reflects the decline
in such expenses, resulting mainly from our efforts to streamline operations, as
described above.
Capital
expenditures for the six months ended June 30, 2009 were $17,000, compared to
$698,000 for the same period in 2008 and we do not expect capital expenditures
to be material for the remainder of 2009. Our future capital requirements
will depend upon many factors, including progress with our marketing efforts,
the time and costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting, maintaining and
enforcing patent claims and other proprietary rights, the necessity of, and time
and costs involved in obtaining, regulatory approvals, competing technological
and market developments, and our ability to establish collaborative
arrangements, effective commercialization, marketing activities and other
arrangements.
As
discussed above, our current plans call for expending cash at a rate of
approximately $750,000 per month, excluding short-term debt, non-current accrued
liability payments and the impact of management’s plans for additional cost
reductions.
Debt
Effective
July 18, 2009, the senior secured note with Highbridge is callable, pursuant to
Highbridge’s optional redemption rights under the amended note agreement dated
July 31, 2008. We are currently negotiating with Highbridge to extend the
optional redemption date. There can be no assurance that we will be successful
in our efforts.
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
From time
to time, we may be involved in litigation relating to claims arising out of our
operations in the normal course of business. As of the date of this
report, we are not currently involved in any legal proceeding that we believe
would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or
operating results.
CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATIONS AND COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS
The
following table sets forth a summary of our material contractual obligations and
commercial commitments as of June 30, 2009 (in thousands):
Less
than
|
1
- 3
|
3
- 5
|
More
than
|
||||||||||||
Contractual
Commitments
|
Total
|
1
year
|
years
|
years
|
5
years
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
Debt Obligations
|
$ | 11,128 | $ | 11,128 | |||||||||||
Capital
Lease Obligations
|
176 | 109 | 67 | - | - | ||||||||||
Operating
Lease Obligations
|
2,143 | 878 | 1,265 | - | - | ||||||||||
Clinical
Studies
|
1,503 | 1,452 | 51 | - | - | ||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 14,950 | $ | 13,567 | $ | 1,383 | $ | - | $ | - |
OFF
BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
As of
June 30, 2009, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Critical
Accounting Estimates
The
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is
based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. GAAP requires
management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. We base our estimates on experience and on
various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about
the carrying values of assets and liabilities that may not be readily apparent
from other sources. On an on-going basis, we evaluate the appropriateness of our
estimates and we maintain a thorough process to review the application of our
accounting policies. Our actual results may differ from these
estimates.
We
consider our critical accounting estimates to be those that (1) involve
significant judgments and uncertainties, (2) require estimates that are
more difficult for management to determine, and (3) may produce materially
different results when using different assumptions. We have discussed these
critical accounting estimates, the basis for their underlying assumptions and
estimates and the nature of our related disclosures herein with the audit
committee of our Board of Directors. We believe our accounting policies specific
to share-based compensation expense, the impairment assessments for intangible
assets and valuation of marketable securities involve our most significant
judgments and estimates that are material to our consolidated financial
statements. They are discussed further below:
Share-based
expense
Commencing
January 1, 2006, we implemented the accounting provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 123R on a modified-prospective basis to
recognize share-based compensation for employee stock option awards in our
statements of operations for future periods. We accounted for the issuance of
stock, stock options and warrants for services from non-employees in accordance
with SFAS 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation and FASB Emerging Issues Task Force Issue
No. 96-18, Accounting For Equity Instruments That Are Issued To Other Than
Employees For Acquiring Or In Conjunction With Selling Goods Or Services
. We estimate the fair value of options and warrants issued using the
Black-Scholes pricing model. This model’s calculations include the exercise
price, the market price of shares on grant date, weighted average assumptions
for risk-free interest rates, expected life of the option or warrant, expected
volatility of our stock and expected dividend yield.
The
amounts recorded in the financial statements for share-based expense could vary
significantly if we were to use different assumptions. For example, the
assumptions we have made for the expected volatility of our stock price have
been based on the historical volatility of our stock measured over a period
generally commensurate with the expected term, since we have a limited history
as a public company and complete reliance on our actual stock price volatility
would not be meaningful. If we were to use the actual volatility of our stock
price, there may be a significant variance in the amounts of share-based expense
from the amounts reported. Based on the 2009 assumptions used for the
Black-Scholes pricing model, a 50% increase in stock price volatility would have
increased the fair values of options by approximately 25%. The weighted average
expected option term for 2009 and 2008 reflects the application of the
simplified method set out in SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107, which
defines the life as the average of the contractual term of the options and the
weighted average vesting period for all option tranches.
From time
to time, we have retained terminated employees as part-time consultants upon
their resignation from the company. Because the employees continued to provide
services to us, their options continued to vest in accordance with the original
terms. Due to the change in classification of the option awards, the options
were considered modified at the date of termination in accordance with SFAS
123R. The modifications were treated as exchanges of the original awards in
return for the issuance of new awards. At the date of termination, the unvested
options were no longer accounted for as employee awards under SFAS 123R and were
accounted for as new non-employee awards under EITF 96-18. The accounting for
the portion of the total grants that have already vested and have been
previously expensed as equity awards is not changed.
Impairment
of Intangible Assets
We have
capitalized significant costs for acquiring patents and other intellectual
property directly related to our products and services. In accordance with SFAS
144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets , we review our intangible
assets for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of these assets may not be recoverable. In reviewing for
impairment, we compare the carrying value of such assets to the estimated
undiscounted future cash flows expected from the use of the assets and/or their
eventual disposition. If the estimated undiscounted future cash flows are less
than their carrying amount, we record an impairment loss to recognize a loss for
the difference between the assets’ fair value and their carrying value. Since we
have not recognized significant revenue to date, our estimates of future revenue
may not be realized and the net realizable value of our capitalized costs of
intellectual property or other intangible assets may become
impaired.
We
performed an impairment test on intellectual property as of March 31, 2009 and
after considering numerous factors, including a valuation of the intellectual
property by an independent third party, we determined that the carrying value of
certain intangible assets was not recoverable and exceeded the fair value and we
recorded an
impairment
charge totaling $355,000 for these assets as of March 31, 2009. These charges
included $122,000 for intangible assets related to our managed treatment center
in Dallas and $233,000 related to intellectual property for additional
indications for the use of the PROMETA Treatment Program that is currently
non-revenue generating. In its valuation, the independent third-party valuation
firm relied on the “relief from royalty” method, as this method was deemed to be
most relevant to the intellectual property assets of the Company. We determined
that the estimated useful lives of the remaining intellectual property properly
reflected the current remaining economic useful lives of the assets. We also
performed an additional impairment test on intellectual property as of June 30,
2009 and determined that no additional impairment charge was
necessary.
Valuation
of Marketable Securities
Investments
include ARS, U.S. Treasury bills, commercial paper and certificates of
deposit with maturity dates greater than three months when purchased, which are
classified as available-for-sale investments and reflected in current or
long-term assets, as appropriate, as marketable securities at fair market value
in accordance with SFAS 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities (SFAS
115). Unrealized gains and losses are reported in
our Consolidated Balance Sheet within accumulated other comprehensive loss
and within other comprehensive loss. Realized gains and losses and declines in
value judged to be “other-than-temporary” are recognized as a non-reversible
impairment charge in the Statement of Operations on the specific identification
method in the period in which they occur.
Since
there have been continued auction failures with our ARS portfolio, quoted prices
for our ARS did not exist as of June 30, 2009 and un-observable inputs were
used. We determined that use of a valuation model was the best available
technique for measuring the fair value of our ARS portfolio and we based our
estimates of the fair value using valuation models and methodologies that
utilize an income-based approach to estimate the price that would be received if
we sold our securities in an orderly transaction between market participants.
The estimated price was derived as the present value of expected cash flows over
an estimated period of illiquidity, using a risk adjusted discount rate that was
based on the credit risk and liquidity risk of the securities.
Based on
the valuation models and methodologies, and consideration of other factors, for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, we recognized approximately
$28,000 and $160,000, respectively, in other-than-temporary decline in value
related to our investment in certain ARS. We also recognized temporary increases
in value of approximately $27,000 and $453,000 related to our investment in
certain other ARS for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively, based on the estimated fair value as determined by management. In
accordance with SFAS 115, other-than-temporary declines in value are reflected
as a non-operating expense in our Consolidated Statements of Operations, whereas
subsequent increases in value are reflected in Stockholders’ Equity on our
Consolidated Balance Sheets. While our valuation model includes inputs based on
observable measures (credit quality and interest rates) and un-observable
inputs, we determined that the un-observable inputs were the most significant to
the overall fair value measurement, particularly the estimates of risk adjusted
discount rates and estimated periods of illiquidity.
We
regularly review the fair value of our investments. If the fair value of any of
our investments falls below our cost basis in the investment, we analyze the
decrease to determine whether it represents an other-than-temporary decline in
value. In making our determination for each investment, we consider the
following factors:
●
|
How
long and by how much the fair value of the investments have been below
cost
|
●
|
The
financial condition of the issuers
|
●
|
Any
downgrades of the investment by rating
agencies
|
●
|
Default
on interest or other terms
|
●
|
The
likeliness that we will be required to sell the investments before they
recover their value
|
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
Recently
Adopted
In
December 2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS 140-4 and FASB Interpretation No. (FIN)
46R-8, Disclosures by Public
Entities (Enterprises) about Transfers of Financial Assets and Interests in
Variable Interest Entities . This FSP amends FASB Statement No. 140 Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities to
require public entities to provide additional disclosures about transfers of
financial assets. It also amends FIN 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities as revised to require public enterprises to provide additional
disclosures about their involvement with VIEs. FSP FAS 140-4 and FIN 46(R)-8 are
effective for the Company's fiscal year ending December 31, 2008. We are
required to consolidate the revenues and expenses of the managed medical
corporations. The financial results of managed treatment centers are included in
our consolidated financial statements under accounting standards applicable to
VIEs, and the required disclosures regarding our involvement with VIEs are
included above under the heading Variable Interest
Entities.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), Business Combinations (SFAS
141(R)). SFAS 141(R) replaces SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations (SFAS
141), which retains the requirement that the purchase method of accounting for
acquisitions be used for all business combinations. SFAS 141(R) expands on the
disclosures previously required by SFAS 141, better defines the acquirer and the
acquisition date in a business combination, and establishes principles for
recognizing and measuring the assets acquired (including goodwill),
the
liabilities
assumed and any non-controlling interests in the acquired business. SFAS 141(R)
also requires an acquirer to record an adjustment to income tax expense for
changes in valuation allowances or uncertain tax positions related to acquired
businesses. SFAS 141(R) is effective for all business combinations with an
acquisition date in the first annual period following December 15, 2008;
early adoption is not permitted. We adopted this statement as of January 1,
2009, and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In April
2008, the FASB issued FSP FAS 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Assets. FSP 142-3 amends the factors that should be considered
in developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life
of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets . This change is intended to improve the consistency between the
useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS No. 142 and the period
of expected cash flows used to measure the fair value of the asset under SFAS
No. 141R and other generally accepted accounting principles in the United States
(GAAP). FSP 142-3 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal
years. The requirement for determining useful lives must be applied
prospectively to intangible assets acquired after the effective date and the
disclosure requirements must be applied prospectively to all intangible assets
recognized as of, and subsequent to, the effective date. The adoption of this
statement did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of
operations, financial position or cash flows, and the required disclosures
regarding our intangible assets are included above under the heading Intangible
Assets.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements—an amendment of ARB No. 51 (SFAS
160). SFAS 160 requires that non-controlling (or minority) interests in
subsidiaries be reported in the equity section of the company's balance sheet,
rather than in a mezzanine section of the balance sheet between liabilities and
equity. SFAS 160 also changes the manner in which the net income of the
subsidiary is reported and disclosed in the controlling company's income
statement. SFAS 160 also establishes guidelines for accounting for changes in
ownership percentages and for deconsolidation. SFAS 160 is effective for
financial statements for fiscal years beginning on or after
December 1, 2008 and interim periods within those years. We adopted SFAS
160 for the fiscal year begun January 1, 2009, and it did not have a material
impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In
May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (SFAS 162). SFAS 162 identifies the sources of
accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles used in the
preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that are
presented in conformity with GAAP. SFAS 162 became effective November 15,
2008. We adopted SFAS 162 for the fiscal year begun January 1, 2009, and it did
not have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
In June
2008, the FASB ratified EITF Issue 07-5, “Determining Whether an Instrument (or
Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock” (EITF 07-5). Paragraph
11(a) of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No 133 “Accounting for
Derivatives and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS 133”) specifies that a contract that
would otherwise meet the definition of a derivative but is both (a) indexed
to the Company’s own stock and (b) classified in stockholders’ equity in
the statement of financial position would not be considered a derivative
financial instrument. EITF 07-5 provides a new two-step model to be applied in
determining whether a financial instrument or an embedded feature is indexed to
an issuer’s own stock and thus able to qualify for the SFAS 133 paragraph 11(a)
scope exception. EITF 07-5 was effective for the first annual reporting period
beginning after December 15, 2008, and early adoption was prohibited. EITF
07-5 did not have any impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
In April
2009, the FASB issued the following three FSPs intended to provide additional
application guidance and enhance disclosures regarding fair value measurements
and impairments of securities:
●
|
FSP
FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2, Recognition and Presentation
of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairments;
|
●
|
FSP
FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair
Value of Financial Instruments;
and
|
●
|
FSP
FAS 157-4, Determining
Fair Value When the Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or
Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That
Are Not Orderly
|
These
FSPs were effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after June
15, 2009, with early adoption permitted for periods ending after March 15, 2009.
We adopted the FSPs for the interim period ended June 30, 2009. Because we will
more likely than not be required to sell our ARS before they recover in value,
these FSPs had no impact on our financial position, results of operations or
cash flows. See above under the headings Marketable Securities
and Fair Value
Measurements for additional disclosures required by these
FSPs.
In May
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 165, Subsequent Events. SFAS 165
establishes principles and requirements for subsequent events including (i) the
specification of the period after the balance sheet date during which management
shall evaluate events or transactions for potential recognition or disclosure in
the financial statements, (ii) the circumstances under which such events or
transactions would be recognized or disclosed, and (iii) the disclosures that an
entity shall make about such events or transactions. SFAS 165 was effective for
annual reporting periods ending after June 15, 2009. We adopted SFAS 165 for the
interim period ended June 30, 2009, and it did not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
Recently
Issued
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation
No. 46(R). SFAS 167 amends
certain requirements of FASB Interpretation 46(R), Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities, to
improve financial reporting by enterprises involved with VIEs. SFAS 167
will be effective for annual reporting periods ending after November 15, 2009.
The adoption of SFAS 167 is not expected to have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 168, The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles. SFAS 168 identifies
the sources of accounting principles and the framework for selecting the
principles used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental
entities that are presented in conformity with GAAP. SFAS 168 will be
effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after September 15,
2009. The adoption of SFAS 168 is not expected to have a material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
Item
3. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
We invest
our cash in short term high grade commercial paper, certificates of deposit,
money market accounts and marketable securities. We consider any liquid
investment with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased to
be cash equivalents. We classify investments with maturity dates greater than
three months when purchased as marketable securities, which have readily
determined fair values at the time of purchase and are classified as
available-for-sale securities. Our investment policy requires that all
investments be investment grade quality and no more than ten percent of our
portfolio may be invested in any one security or with one institution. We have not
invested in any instruments which are not classified as "available-for-sale"
securities pursuant to SFAS 115.
As of
June 30, 2009 our total investment in ARS was $11.5 million. Since February 13,
2008, auctions for these securities have failed, meaning the parties desiring to
sell securities could not be matched with an adequate number of buyers,
resulting in our having to continue to hold these securities. Although the
securities are Aaa/AAA rated and collateralized by portfolios of student loans
guaranteed by the U.S. government, based on current market conditions it is
likely that auctions will continue to be unsuccessful in the short-term,
limiting the liquidity of these investments until the auction succeeds, the
issuer calls the securities, or they mature. The remaining maturity periods
range from nineteen to thirty-eight years. As a result, our ability to liquidate
our investment and fully recover the carrying value of our investment in the
near term may be limited or not exist.
In making
our determination whether losses are considered to be “other-than-temporary”
declines in value, we consider the following factors at each quarter-end
reporting period:
●
|
How
long and by how much the fair value of the ARS securities have been below
cost,
|
●
|
The
financial condition of the issuers,
|
●
|
Any
downgrades of the securities by rating
agencies,
|
●
|
Default
on interest or other terms, and
|
●
|
The
likeliness that we will be required to sell the ARS before they recover
their value.
|
For the
three and six months ended June 30, 2009, we recognized approximately $28,000
and $160,000, respectively, in other-than-temporary decline in value related to
our investment in certain ARS. We also recognized temporary increases in value
of approximately $27,000 and $453,000 related to our investment in certain other
ARS for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, respectively, based on the
estimated fair value as determined by management. These securities will be
analyzed each reporting period for additional other-than-temporary
impairment factors.
In May
2008, our investment portfolio manager, UBS AG (UBS), provided us with a demand
margin loan facility, allowing us to borrow up to 50% of the market value of the
ARS, as determined by UBS. The margin loan facility is collateralized by the
ARS. In October 2008, UBS made a “Rights” offering to its clients, pursuant to
which we are entitled to sell to UBS all auction-rate securities held by us in
our UBS account. The Rights permit us to require UBS to purchase our ARS for a
price equal to original par value plus any accrued but unpaid interest beginning
on June 30, 2010 and ending on July 2, 2012 if the securities are not
earlier redeemed or sold. Because of our ability to sell the ARS under the UBS
rights offering, the ARS investments have been classified in current assets at
June 30, 2009. As part of the rights offering, UBS would provide us a line of
credit equal to 75% of the market value of the ARS until they are purchased by
UBS. The line of credit has certain restrictions described in the
prospectus. We accepted this offer on November 6, 2008.
The
weighted average interest rate of marketable securities held at June 30, 2009
was 1.30%. Investments in both fixed rate and floating rate interest earning
instruments carry a degree of interest rate risk arising from changes in the
level or volatility of interest rates; however interest rate movements do not
materially affect the market value of our ARS because of the frequency of the
rate resets and the short-term nature of these investments. A reduction in the
overall level of interest rates may produce less interest income from our
investment portfolio. If overall interest rates had declined by an average of
100 basis points during the three months ended June 30, 2009, the amount of
interest income earned from our investment portfolio during that period would
have decreased by an estimated amount of $31,000. The market risk associated
with our investments in debt securities is substantially mitigated by the
frequent turnover of our portfolio.
We have
no material foreign exchange risk.
Item
4. Controls
and Procedures
We have
evaluated, with the participation of our chief executive officer and our chief
financial officer, the effectiveness of our system of disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on this
evaluation our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer have
determined that they are effective in connection with the preparation of this
report. There were no changes in the internal controls over financial
reporting that occurred during the quarter ended June 30, 2009 that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting.
PART II – OTHER
INFORMATION
|
CAUTIONARY
STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
This
report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial
condition, results of operations, business strategies, operating efficiencies or
synergies, competitive positions, growth opportunities for existing products,
plans and objectives of management, markets for stock of Hythiam and other
matters. Statements in this report that are not historical facts are hereby
identified as “forward-looking statements” for the purpose of the safe harbor
provided by Section 21E of the Exchange Act and Section 27A of the Securities
Act. Such forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, those
relating to the future business prospects, revenue and income of Hythiam,
wherever they occur, are necessarily estimates reflecting the best judgment of
the senior management of Hythiam on the date on which they were made, or if no
date is stated, as of the date of this report. These forward-looking statements
are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described
in the “Risk Factors” in Item 1 of Part I of our most recent Annual Report on
Form 10-K, filed with the SEC, that may affect the operations, performance,
development and results of our business. Because the factors discussed in this
report could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those
expressed in any forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf, you
should not place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. New
factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict which
factors will arise. In addition, we cannot assess the impact of each factor on
our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may
cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any
forward-looking statements.
You
should understand that the following important factors, in addition to those
discussed above and in the “Risk Factors” could affect our future results and
could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in such
forward-looking statements:
●
|
the
anticipated results of clinical studies on our treatment programs, and the
publication of those results in medical
journals
|
●
|
plans
to have our treatment programs approved for reimbursement by third-party
payers
|
●
|
plans
to license our treatment programs to more healthcare
providers
|
●
|
marketing
plans to raise awareness of our PROMETA treatment
programs
|
●
|
anticipated
trends and conditions in the industry in which we operate, including our
future operating results, capital needs, and ability to obtain
financing
|
●
|
CompCare’s
ability to estimate claims, predict utilization and manage its
contracts
|
We
undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or any other
reason. All subsequent forward-looking statements attributable to the Company or
any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
cautionary statements contained or referred to herein. In light of these risks,
uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this
report may not occur.
Item
6. Exhibits
Exhibit
4.1
|
Form
of Indenture, incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Hythiam, Inc.'s
Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed on April 3,
2009
|
|
Exhibit
31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
|
Exhibit
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
|
Exhibit
32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
|
Exhibit
32.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002
|
SIGNATURES
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
HYTHIAM,
INC.
|
||
Date:
August 10, 2009
|
By:
|
/s/
TERREN S. PEIZER
|
Terren
S. Peizer
|
||
Chief
Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
||
Date:
August 10, 2009
|
By:
|
s/
MAURICE HEBERT
|
Maurice
Hebert
|
||
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial and Accounting
Officer)
|
II-2