Companies:
10,652
total market cap:
$140.367 T
Sign In
๐บ๐ธ
EN
English
$ USD
โฌ
EUR
๐ช๐บ
โน
INR
๐ฎ๐ณ
ยฃ
GBP
๐ฌ๐ง
$
CAD
๐จ๐ฆ
$
AUD
๐ฆ๐บ
$
NZD
๐ณ๐ฟ
$
HKD
๐ญ๐ฐ
$
SGD
๐ธ๐ฌ
Global ranking
Ranking by countries
America
๐บ๐ธ United States
๐จ๐ฆ Canada
๐ฒ๐ฝ Mexico
๐ง๐ท Brazil
๐จ๐ฑ Chile
Europe
๐ช๐บ European Union
๐ฉ๐ช Germany
๐ฌ๐ง United Kingdom
๐ซ๐ท France
๐ช๐ธ Spain
๐ณ๐ฑ Netherlands
๐ธ๐ช Sweden
๐ฎ๐น Italy
๐จ๐ญ Switzerland
๐ต๐ฑ Poland
๐ซ๐ฎ Finland
Asia
๐จ๐ณ China
๐ฏ๐ต Japan
๐ฐ๐ท South Korea
๐ญ๐ฐ Hong Kong
๐ธ๐ฌ Singapore
๐ฎ๐ฉ Indonesia
๐ฎ๐ณ India
๐ฒ๐พ Malaysia
๐น๐ผ Taiwan
๐น๐ญ Thailand
๐ป๐ณ Vietnam
Others
๐ฆ๐บ Australia
๐ณ๐ฟ New Zealand
๐ฎ๐ฑ Israel
๐ธ๐ฆ Saudi Arabia
๐น๐ท Turkey
๐ท๐บ Russia
๐ฟ๐ฆ South Africa
>> All Countries
Ranking by categories
๐ All assets by Market Cap
๐ Automakers
โ๏ธ Airlines
๐ซ Airports
โ๏ธ Aircraft manufacturers
๐ฆ Banks
๐จ Hotels
๐ Pharmaceuticals
๐ E-Commerce
โ๏ธ Healthcare
๐ฆ Courier services
๐ฐ Media/Press
๐ท Alcoholic beverages
๐ฅค Beverages
๐ Clothing
โ๏ธ Mining
๐ Railways
๐ฆ Insurance
๐ Real estate
โ Ports
๐ผ Professional services
๐ด Food
๐ Restaurant chains
โ๐ป Software
๐ Semiconductors
๐ฌ Tobacco
๐ณ Financial services
๐ข Oil&Gas
๐ Electricity
๐งช Chemicals
๐ฐ Investment
๐ก Telecommunication
๐๏ธ Retail
๐ฅ๏ธ Internet
๐ Construction
๐ฎ Video Game
๐ป Tech
๐ฆพ AI
>> All Categories
ETFs
๐ All ETFs
๐๏ธ Bond ETFs
๏ผ Dividend ETFs
โฟ Bitcoin ETFs
โข Ethereum ETFs
๐ช Crypto Currency ETFs
๐ฅ Gold ETFs & ETCs
๐ฅ Silver ETFs & ETCs
๐ข๏ธ Oil ETFs & ETCs
๐ฝ Commodities ETFs & ETNs
๐ Emerging Markets ETFs
๐ Small-Cap ETFs
๐ Low volatility ETFs
๐ Inverse/Bear ETFs
โฌ๏ธ Leveraged ETFs
๐ Global/World ETFs
๐บ๐ธ USA ETFs
๐บ๐ธ S&P 500 ETFs
๐บ๐ธ Dow Jones ETFs
๐ช๐บ Europe ETFs
๐จ๐ณ China ETFs
๐ฏ๐ต Japan ETFs
๐ฎ๐ณ India ETFs
๐ฌ๐ง UK ETFs
๐ฉ๐ช Germany ETFs
๐ซ๐ท France ETFs
โ๏ธ Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Gold Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Silver Mining ETFs
๐งฌ Biotech ETFs
๐ฉโ๐ป Tech ETFs
๐ Real Estate ETFs
โ๏ธ Healthcare ETFs
โก Energy ETFs
๐ Renewable Energy ETFs
๐ก๏ธ Insurance ETFs
๐ฐ Water ETFs
๐ด Food & Beverage ETFs
๐ฑ Socially Responsible ETFs
๐ฃ๏ธ Infrastructure ETFs
๐ก Innovation ETFs
๐ Semiconductors ETFs
๐ Aerospace & Defense ETFs
๐ Cybersecurity ETFs
๐ฆพ Artificial Intelligence ETFs
Watchlist
Account
Ventas
VTR
#675
Rank
$36.32 B
Marketcap
๐บ๐ธ
United States
Country
$77.32
Share price
-0.44%
Change (1 day)
27.87%
Change (1 year)
๐ Real estate
Categories
Ventas, Inc.
is a real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership and management of health care facilities in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom.
Market cap
Revenue
Earnings
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
Annual Reports (10-K)
More
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
P/B ratio
Operating margin
EPS
Stock Splits
Dividends
Dividend yield
Shares outstanding
Fails to deliver
Cost to borrow
Total assets
Total liabilities
Total debt
Cash on Hand
Net Assets
Ventas
Annual Reports (10-K)
Financial Year 2017
Ventas - 10-K annual report 2017
Text size:
Small
Medium
Large
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017
OR
¨
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 1-10989
VENTAS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
61-1055020
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)
353 N. Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
60654
(Zip Code)
(877) 483-6827
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, par value $0.25 per share
New York Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes
¨
No
x
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 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
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, 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
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment of this Form 10-K.
x
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act
Large accelerated filer
x
Accelerated filer
¨
Non-accelerated filer
¨
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting company
¨
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes
¨
No
x
The aggregate market value of shares of the Registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant on June 30,
2017
, based on a closing price of the common stock of $69.48 as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, was
$18.8 billion
. For purposes of the foregoing calculation only, all directors, executive officers and 10% beneficial owners of the Registrant have been deemed affiliates.
As of
January 31, 2018
, there were
356,198,053
shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 15, 2018 are incorporated by reference into Part III, Items 10 through 14 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS
Unless otherwise indicated or except where the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” and other similar terms in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer to Ventas, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.
Forward-Looking Statements
This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). All statements regarding our or our tenants’, operators’, borrowers’ or managers’ expected future financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, funds from operations, dividends and dividend plans, financing opportunities and plans, capital markets transactions, business strategy, budgets, projected costs, operating metrics, capital expenditures, competitive positions, acquisitions, investment opportunities, dispositions, merger integration, growth opportunities, expected lease income, continued qualification as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”), plans and objectives of management for future operations, and statements that include words such as “anticipate,” “if,” “believe,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “could,” “should,” “will,” and other similar expressions are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain, and actual results may differ from our expectations. We do not undertake a duty to update these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date on which they are made.
Our actual future results and trends may differ materially from expectations depending on a variety of factors discussed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). These factors include without limitation:
•
The ability and willingness of our tenants, operators, borrowers, managers and other third parties to satisfy their obligations under their respective contractual arrangements with us, including, in some cases, their obligations to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation and liabilities;
•
The ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to maintain the financial strength and liquidity necessary to satisfy their respective obligations and liabilities to third parties, including without limitation obligations under their existing credit facilities and other indebtedness;
•
Our success in implementing our business strategy and our ability to identify, underwrite, finance, consummate and integrate diversifying acquisitions and investments;
•
Macroeconomic conditions such as a disruption of or lack of access to the capital markets, changes in the debt rating on U.S. government securities, default or delay in payment by the United States of its obligations, and changes in the federal or state budgets resulting in the reduction or nonpayment of Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement rates;
•
The nature and extent of future competition, including new construction in the markets in which our seniors housing communities and office buildings are located;
•
The extent and effect of future or pending healthcare reform and regulation, including cost containment measures and changes in reimbursement policies, procedures and rates;
•
Increases in our borrowing costs as a result of changes in interest rates and other factors;
•
The ability of our tenants, operators and managers, as applicable, to comply with laws, rules and regulations in the operation of our properties, to deliver high-quality services, to attract and retain qualified personnel and to attract residents and patients;
•
Changes in general economic conditions or economic conditions in the markets in which we may, from time to time, compete, and the effect of those changes on our revenues, earnings and funding sources;
•
Our ability to pay down, refinance, restructure or extend our indebtedness as it becomes due;
•
Our ability and willingness to maintain our qualification as a REIT in light of economic, market, legal, tax and other considerations;
i
•
Final determination of our taxable net income for the year ended
December 31, 2017
and for the year ending December 31,
2018
;
•
The ability and willingness of our tenants to renew their leases with us upon expiration of the leases, our ability to reposition our properties on the same or better terms in the event of nonrenewal or in the event we exercise our right to replace an existing tenant, and obligations, including indemnification obligations, we may incur in connection with the replacement of an existing tenant;
•
Risks associated with our senior living operating portfolio, such as factors that can cause volatility in our operating income and earnings generated by those properties, including without limitation national and regional economic conditions, development of new competing properties, costs of food, materials, energy, labor and services, employee benefit costs, insurance costs and professional and general liability claims, and the timely delivery of accurate property-level financial results for those properties;
•
Changes in exchange rates for any foreign currency in which we may, from time to time, conduct business;
•
Year-over-year changes in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) or the U.K. Retail Price Index and the effect of those changes on the rent escalators contained in our leases and on our earnings;
•
Our ability and the ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to obtain and maintain adequate property, liability and other insurance from reputable, financially stable providers;
•
The impact of increased operating costs and uninsured professional liability claims on our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations or that of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers and our ability and the ability of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers to accurately estimate the magnitude of those claims;
•
Risks associated with our office building portfolio and operations, including our ability to successfully design, develop and manage office buildings and to retain key personnel;
•
The ability of the hospitals on or near whose campuses our medical office buildings (“MOBs”) are located and their affiliated health systems to remain competitive and financially viable and to attract physicians and physician groups;
•
Risks associated with our investments in joint ventures and unconsolidated entities, including our lack of sole decision-making authority and our reliance on our joint venture partners’ financial condition;
•
Our ability to obtain the financial results expected from our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken through our joint ventures;
•
The impact of market or issuer events on the liquidity or value of our investments in marketable securities;
•
Consolidation in the seniors housing and healthcare industries resulting in a change of control of, or a competitor’s investment in, one or more of our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers or significant changes in the senior management of our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers;
•
The impact of litigation or any financial, accounting, legal or regulatory issues that may affect us or our tenants, operators, borrowers or managers; and
•
Changes in accounting principles, or their application or interpretation, and our ability to make estimates and the assumptions underlying the estimates, which could have an effect on our earnings.
Many of these factors, some of which are described in greater detail under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, are beyond our control and the control of our management.
Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred, Atria, Sunrise and Ardent Information
Each of Brookdale Senior Living Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) is subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC and is required to
ii
file with the SEC annual reports containing audited financial information and quarterly reports containing unaudited financial information. The information related to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from SEC filings made by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, as the case may be, or other publicly available information or was provided to us by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy. We are providing this data for informational purposes only, and you are encouraged to obtain Brookdale Senior Living’s and Kindred’s publicly available filings, which can be found on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”), Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”) and Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) are not currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria, Sunrise and Ardent contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from publicly available information or was provided to us by Atria, Sunrise or Ardent, as the case may be, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Item 1.
Business
1
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
15
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
32
Item 2.
Properties
33
Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
35
Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
35
PART II
Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
36
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
39
Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
40
Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
75
Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
76
Item 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
179
Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
179
Item 9B.
Other Information
179
PART III
Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
179
Item 11.
Executive Compensation
179
Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
179
Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
180
Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
180
PART IV
Item 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
181
Item 16.
10-K Summary
191
iv
PART I
ITEM 1.
Business
BUSINESS
Overview
Ventas, Inc., an S&P 500 company, is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”)
with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned more than
1,200
properties (including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), life science and innovation centers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”) and long-term acute care facilities (“LTACs”), health systems and skilled nursing facilities (“SNFs”), and we had
14
properties under development, including
four
properties that are owned by unconsolidated real estate entities.
Our company was originally founded in 1983 and is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased a total of
546
properties (excluding MOBs) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures.
As of
December 31, 2017
, pursuant to long-term management agreements, we engaged independent operators, such as Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) and Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”), to manage
297
seniors housing communities for us.
Our
three
largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”), Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) leased from us
135
properties (excluding
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement),
10
properties and
31
properties (excluding
one
MOB included within our office operations reportable business segment), respectively, as of
December 31, 2017
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Lillibridge”) subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC (“PMBRES”), we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
We operate through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. See our Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes, including “
NOTE 2—ACCOUNTING POLICIES
” and “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
,” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Business Strategy
We aim to enhance shareholder value by delivering consistent, superior total returns through a strategy of: (1) generating reliable and growing cash flows; (2) maintaining a balanced, diversified portfolio of high-quality assets; and (3) preserving our financial strength, flexibility and liquidity.
Generating Reliable and Growing Cash Flows
Generating reliable and growing cash flows from our seniors housing and healthcare assets enables us to pay regular cash dividends to stockholders and creates opportunities to increase stockholder value through profitable investments. The combination of steady contractual growth from our long-term triple-net leases, steady, reliable cash flows from our loan investments and stable cash flows from our office buildings with the higher growth potential inherent in our seniors housing operating communities drives our ability to generate sustainable, growing cash flows that are resilient to economic downturns.
1
Maintaining a Balanced, Diversified Portfolio
We believe that maintaining a balanced portfolio of high-quality assets diversified by investment type, geographic location, asset type, tenant/operator, revenue source and operating model diminishes the risk that any single factor or event could materially harm our business. Portfolio diversification also enhances the reliability of our cash flows by reducing our exposure to any individual tenant, operator or manager and making us less susceptible to single-state regulatory or reimbursement changes, regional climate events and local economic downturns.
Preserving Our Financial Strength, Flexibility and Liquidity
A strong, flexible balance sheet and excellent liquidity position us favorably to capitalize on strategic growth opportunities in the seniors housing and healthcare industries through acquisitions, investments and development and redevelopment projects. We maintain our financial strength to pursue profitable investment opportunities by actively managing our leverage, improving our cost of capital and preserving our access to multiple sources of liquidity, including unsecured bank debt, mortgage financings and public debt and equity markets.
2017
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
Investments and Dispositions
•
In March 2017, we provided secured debt financing to a subsidiary of Ardent to facilitate Ardent’s acquisition of LHP Hospital Group, Inc., which included a
$700.0 million
term loan and a
$60.0 million
revolving line of credit feature (of which
$28.0 million
was outstanding at
December 31, 2017
). The LIBOR-based debt financing has a five-year term, a
one
-year lock out feature and a weighted average interest rate of approximately
9.3%
as of
December 31, 2017
and is guaranteed by Ardent’s parent company.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we acquired
15
triple-net leased properties (including
six
assets previously owned by an equity method investee),
four
properties reported within our office operations reportable business segment (
three
life science, research and medical assets and
one
MOB) and
three
seniors housing communities (reported within our senior living operations reportable business segment) for an aggregate purchase price of
$691.3 million
.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we sold
53
triple-net leased properties,
five
MOBs and certain vacant land parcels for aggregate consideration of
$870.8 million
, and we recognized a gain on the sale of these assets of
$717.3 million
, net of taxes.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$37.6 million
for the partial prepayment and
$35.5 million
for the full repayment of loans receivable, which resulted in total gains of
$0.6 million
.
Liquidity, Capital and Dividends
•
In March 2017, we issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.100%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.280%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.850%
senior notes due 2027 at a public offering price equal to
99.196%
of par, for total proceeds of
$396.8 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
•
In April 2017, we entered into an unsecured credit facility comprised of a
$3.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility, priced at LIBOR plus
0.875%
, that replaced our previous
$2.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility priced at LIBOR plus
1.0%
.
•
In April 2017, we repaid in full, at par,
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 upon maturity.
•
In June 2017, we issued and sold
C$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.55%
senior notes, Series D due 2023 at a price equal to
99.954%
of par, for total proceeds of
C$274.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses. We used part of the proceeds to repay
C$124.4 million
on our unsecured term loan due 2019.
•
In August 2017, we used most of the proceeds from the sale of
22
SNFs to repay the balances then outstanding on the 2018 and 2019 term loans.
2
•
In September 2017, we entered into a new
$400.0 million
secured revolving construction credit facility which matures in 2022 and will be primarily used to finance life science and innovation center and other construction projects.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we issued and sold
1.1 million
shares of common stock under our “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program. Aggregate net proceeds for these activities were
$73.9 million
, after sales agent commissions.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we paid the first three quarterly installments of our 2017 dividend of
$0.775
per share. In December 2017, we declared the fourth quarter cash dividend on our common stock of
$0.79
per share, which grew by
2%
over third quarter
2017
and was paid in January 2018.
Portfolio
•
The sale of the triple-net leased properties above included
36
SNFs, owned by us and operated by Kindred. These assets were sold for aggregate consideration of approximately
$700 million
and we recognized a gain on the sale of
$657.6 million
, net of taxes.
Other Recent Developments
•
In January 2018, we transitioned the management of 76 private pay seniors housing communities to Eclipse Senior Living (“ESL”). These assets, substantially all of which were previously leased by Elmcroft Senior Living (“Elmcroft”), are now operated by ESL under a management contract with us. We acquired a 34% ownership stake in ESL with customary rights and protections. ESL management owns the remaining 66% stake. We also intend to form a new joint venture with an institutional partner related to the assets previously leased by Elmcroft. However, there can be no assurance whether, when or on what terms the joint venture will be completed.
Portfolio Summary
The following table summarizes our consolidated portfolio of properties and other investments as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2017
:
Real Estate Property Investments
Revenues
Asset Type
# of
Properties
(1)
# of Units/
Sq. Ft./Beds
(2)
Real Estate Property Investment, at Cost
Percent of
Total Real Estate Property Investments
Real Estate
Property
Investment Per Unit/Bed/Sq. Ft.
Revenue
Percent of Total Revenues
(Dollars in thousands)
Seniors housing communities
747
65,428
$16,616,501
63.4
%
$
254.0
$2,342,247
65.5
%
MOBs
(3)
354
19,221,003
5,332,817
20.3
0.3
579,363
16.2
Life science and innovation centers
29
5,156,868
1,940,099
7.4
0.4
174,391
4.9
IRFs and LTACs
37
3,115
459,753
1.8
147.6
154,094
4.3
Health systems
12
2,064
1,475,975
5.6
715.1
109,546
3.1
SNFs
17
1,882
204,488
0.8
108.7
64,086
1.8
Development properties and other
10
176,200
0.7
Total real estate investments, at cost
1,206
$
26,205,833
100.0
%
Income from loans and investments
117,608
3.3
Interest and other income
6,034
0.2
Revenues related to assets classified as held for sale
8
26,780
0.7
Total revenues
$
3,574,149
100.0
%
(1)
As of
December 31, 2017
, we also owned
17
seniors housing communities,
13
SNFs and
one
MOB
through investments in unconsolidated entities. Our consolidated properties were located in
46
states, the District of Columbia,
seven
Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom and were operated or managed by
91
unaffiliated healthcare operating companies, including the following publicly traded companies or their subsidiaries: Brookdale Senior Living (
129
properties) (excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement and included in the senior living operations reportable business segment); Kindred (
31
properties) (excluding
one
MOB included in the office operations reportable business segment); 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. (
12
properties); Capital Senior Living Corporation (
seven
properties); Spire Healthcare plc (
three
properties); and HealthSouth Corp. (
four
properties).
(2)
Seniors housing communities are measured in units; MOBs and life science and innovation centers are measured by square footage; and IRFs and LTACs, health systems and SNFs are measured by bed count.
3
(3)
As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased
65
of our consolidated MOBs pursuant to triple-net leases, Lillibridge or PMBRES managed
270
of our consolidated MOBs and
19
of our consolidated MOBs were managed by
seven
unaffiliated managers. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we also provided management and leasing services for
105
MOBs owned by third parties as of
December 31, 2017
.
Seniors Housing and Healthcare Properties
As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned a total of
1,235
seniors housing and healthcare properties (including properties classified as held for sale) as follows:
Consolidated
(100% interest)
Consolidated
(<100% interest)
Unconsolidated
(5-25% interest)
Total
Seniors housing communities
738
9
17
764
MOBs
314
48
1
363
Life science and innovation centers
18
11
—
29
IRFs and LTACs
36
1
—
37
Health systems
12
—
—
12
SNFs
17
—
13
30
Total
1,135
69
31
1,235
Seniors Housing Communities
Our seniors housing communities include independent and assisted living communities, continuing care retirement communities and communities providing care for individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia or memory loss. These communities offer studio, one bedroom and two bedroom residential units on a month-to-month basis primarily to elderly individuals requiring various levels of assistance. Basic services for residents of these communities include housekeeping, meals in a central dining area and group activities organized by the staff with input from the residents. More extensive care and personal supervision, at additional fees, are also available for such needs as eating, bathing, grooming, transportation, limited therapeutic programs and medication administration, which allow residents certain conveniences and enable them to live as independently as possible according to their abilities. These services are often met by home health providers and through close coordination with the resident’s physician and SNFs. Charges for room, board and services are generally paid from private sources.
Medical Office Buildings
Typically, our MOBs are multi-tenant properties leased to several unrelated medical practices, although in many cases they may be associated with a large single specialty or multi-specialty group. Tenants include physicians, dentists, psychologists, therapists and other healthcare providers, who require space devoted to patient examination and treatment, diagnostic imaging, outpatient surgery and other outpatient services. MOBs are similar to commercial office buildings, although they require greater plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems to accommodate physicians’ requirements such as sinks in every room, brighter lights and specialized medical equipment. As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned or managed for third parties approximately
23 million
square feet of MOBs that are predominantly located on or near a health system.
Life Science and Innovation Centers
Our life science and innovation centers contain laboratory and office space primarily for scientific research for universities, academic medical centers, technology, biotechnology, medical device and pharmaceutical companies and other organizations involved in the life science industry. While these properties have characteristics similar to commercial office buildings, they generally contain more advanced electrical, mechanical, and heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems. The facilities generally have specialty equipment including emergency generators, fume hoods, lab bench tops and related amenities. In many instances, life science tenants make significant investments to improve their leased space, in addition to landlord improvements, to accommodate biology, chemistry or medical device research initiatives. Our life science and innovation centers are primarily located on or contiguous to university and academic medical campuses. The campus settings allow us the opportunity to provide flexible, contiguous/adjacent expansion to accommodate the growth of existing tenants.
Inpatient Rehabilitation and Long-term Acute Care Facilities
We have
29
properties that are operated as LTACs. LTACs have a Medicare average length of stay of greater than 25 days and serve medically complex, chronically ill patients who require a high level of monitoring and specialized care, but whose conditions do not necessitate the continued services of an intensive care unit. The operators of these LTACs have the
4
capability to treat patients who suffer from multiple systemic failures or conditions such as neurological disorders, head injuries, brain stem and spinal cord trauma, cerebral vascular accidents, chemical brain injuries, central nervous system disorders, developmental anomalies and cardiopulmonary disorders. Chronic patients often depend on technology for continued life support, such as mechanical ventilators, total parenteral nutrition, respiration or cardiac monitors and dialysis machines, and, due to their severe medical conditions, generally are not clinically appropriate for admission to a nursing facility or rehabilitation hospital. All of our LTACs are freestanding facilities, and we do not own any “hospitals within hospitals.” We also own
eight
IRFs devoted to the rehabilitation of patients with various neurological, musculoskeletal, orthopedic and other medical conditions following stabilization of their acute medical issues.
Health Systems
We have
12
properties that are operated as health systems. Health systems provide medical and surgical services, including inpatient care, intensive care, cardiac care, diagnostic services and emergency services. These health systems also provide outpatient services such as outpatient surgery, laboratory, radiology, respiratory therapy, cardiology and physical therapy. In the United States, these health systems receive payments for patient services from the federal government primarily under the Medicare program, state governments under their respective Medicaid or similar programs, health maintenance organizations, preferred provider organizations, other private insurers and directly from patients.
Skilled Nursing Facilities
We have
17
properties that are operated as SNFs. SNFs provide rehabilitative, restorative, skilled nursing and medical treatment for patients and residents who do not require the high technology, care-intensive, high cost setting of an acute care or rehabilitation hospital. Treatment programs include physical, occupational, speech, respiratory and other therapies, including sub-acute clinical protocols such as wound care and intravenous drug treatment. Charges for these services are generally paid from a combination of government reimbursement and private sources.
Geographic Diversification of Properties
Our portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties is broadly diversified by geographic location throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, with properties in only
one
state (
California
) accounting for more than 10% of our total continuing revenues and net operating income (“NOI,” which is defined as total revenues, excluding interest and other income, less property-level operating expenses and office building services costs) for the year ended
December 31, 2017
.
5
The following table shows our continuing rental income and resident fees and services by geographic location for the year ended
December 31, 2017
:
Rental Income and
Resident Fees and
Services
Percent of Total
Revenues
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
546,184
15.3
%
New York
308,366
8.6
Texas
206,709
5.8
Illinois
170,846
4.8
Florida
158,889
4.4
Pennsylvania
148,882
4.2
Connecticut
114,040
3.2
Georgia
114,038
3.2
North Carolina
112,137
3.1
Arizona
104,684
2.9
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
1,239,588
34.8
Total U.S
3,224,363
90.3
%
Canada (7 provinces)
186,049
5.2
United Kingdom
26,418
0.7
Total
(1)
$
3,436,830
96.2
%
(1)
The remainder of our total revenues is office building and other services revenue, income from loans and investments and interest and other income.
The following table shows our continuing NOI by geographic location for the year ended
December 31, 2017
:
NOI
(1)
Percent of Total
NOI
(Dollars in thousands)
Geographic Location
California
$
288,435
13.9
%
Texas
132,305
6.4
New York
119,123
5.7
Illinois
107,034
5.1
Florida
93,746
4.5
Pennsylvania
82,900
4.0
Connecticut
73,121
3.5
North Carolina
60,188
2.9
Washington
42,816
2.1
Indiana
43,992
2.1
Other (36 states and the District of Columbia)
801,854
38.5
Total U.S
1,845,514
88.7
%
Canada (7 provinces)
92,112
4.4
United Kingdom
26,418
1.3
Total
(2)
$
1,964,044
94.4
%
(1)
See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Non-GAAP Financial Measures—NOI” included in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a reconciliation of NOI to its most directly comparable GAAP measure, income from continuing operations.
(2)
The remainder of our total NOI is income from loans and investments.
6
See “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information regarding the geographic diversification of our portfolio.
Loans and Investments
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$1.4 billion
of net loans receivable and investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties. Our loans receivable and investments provide us with interest income, principal amortization and transaction fees and are typically secured by mortgage liens or leasehold mortgages on the underlying properties and corporate or personal guarantees by affiliates of the borrowing entity. In some cases, the loans are secured by a pledge of ownership interests in the entity or entities that own the related seniors housing or healthcare properties. From time to time, we also make investments in mezzanine loans, which are subordinated to senior secured loans held by other investors that encumber the same real estate. See “
NOTE 6—LOANS RECEIVABLE AND INVESTMENTS
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Development and Redevelopment Projects
We are party to certain agreements that obligate us to develop seniors housing or healthcare properties funded through capital that we and, in certain circumstances, our joint venture partners provide. As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
14
properties under development pursuant to these agreements, including
four
properties that are owned through unconsolidated real estate entities. In addition, from time to time, we engage in redevelopment projects with respect to our existing seniors housing communities to maximize the value, increase NOI, maintain a market-competitive position, achieve property stabilization or change the primary use of the property.
Segment Information
We operate through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. Non-segment assets, classified as “all other,” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable. Our chief operating decision makers evaluate performance of the combined properties in each reportable business segment and determine how to allocate resources to these segments, in significant part, based on segment NOI and related measures. For further information regarding our business segments and a discussion of our definition of segment NOI, see “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Significant Tenants, Operators and Managers
The following table summarizes certain information regarding our tenant, operator and manager concentration as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2017
(excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
):
Number of
Properties Leased
or Managed
Percent of Total Real Estate Investments
(1)
Percent of Total Revenues
Percent of NOI
Senior living operations
(2)
293
35.1
%
51.9
%
29.0
%
Brookdale Senior Living
(3)
129
7.5
4.9
8.3
Ardent
10
4.9
3.1
5.4
Kindred
(4)
32
1.1
4.3
7.5
(1)
Based on gross book value.
(2)
Excludes
four
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities.
(3)
Excludes
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement and included in the senior living operations reportable business segment.
(4)
Includes
one
MOB included in the office operations reportable business segment.
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Each of our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred is a triple-net lease that obligates the tenant to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and to comply with the terms of the mortgage financing documents, if any, affecting the properties. In addition, each of our Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred leases has a corporate guaranty. Brookdale Senior Living has multiple leases with us and those leases contain cross-default provisions tied to each other, as well as lease renewals by lease agreement or by pool of assets.
7
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the year ended
December 31, 2017
. If any of Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline, and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be impaired. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity, our ability to service our indebtedness and other obligations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT (a “Material Adverse Effect”). We also cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will elect to renew their respective leases with us upon expiration of the leases or that we will be able to reposition any non-renewed properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
Our leases and other agreements with Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Brookdale Senior Living Leases
As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased
129
consolidated properties (excluding
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement and included in the senior living operations reportable business segment) to Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to multiple lease agreements.
Pursuant to our lease agreements, Brookdale Senior Living is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually at a specified rate over the prior period base rent. As of
December 31, 2017
, the aggregate
2018
contractual cash rent due to us from Brookdale Senior Living, excluding variable interest that Brookdale Senior Living is obligated to pay as additional rent based on certain floating rate mortgage debt, was approximately
$180.3 million
, and the current aggregate contractual base rent (computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”)) due to us from Brookdale Senior Living, excluding the variable interest, was approximately
$162.3 million
(in each case, excluding
six
properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities as of
December 31, 2017
). See “
NOTE 3—CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK
” and “
NOTE 14—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Ardent Lease
As of
December 31, 2017
,
we leased
10
properties to Ardent pursuant to a single, triple-net master lease agreement. Per our master lease agreement, Ardent is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually by the lesser of
four
times the increase in the consumer price index for the relevant period and
2.5%
. The initial term of the master lease expires on August 31, 2035 and Ardent has
one
ten
-year renewal option.
As of
December 31, 2017
, the aggregate
2018
contractual cash rent due to us from Ardent was approximately
$113.4 million
, and the current aggregate contractual base rent (computed in accordance with GAAP) due to us from Ardent was also approximately
$113.4 million
.
Kindred Master Leases
As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased
29
properties to Kindred pursuant to a master lease agreement. In November 2016, Kindred extended the lease term to 2025 for all of our LTACs operated by Kindred that were scheduled to mature in 2018 and 2020, at the current rent level.
The aggregate annual rent we receive under each Kindred master lease is referred to as “base rent.” Base rent escalates annually at a specified rate over the prior period base rent, contingent, in some cases, upon the satisfaction of specified facility revenue parameters. The annual rent escalator under the Kindred master lease for
25
properties is based on year-over-year changes in CPI, subject to a floor and cap, and is 2.7% for
four
properties. As of
December 31, 2017
, the aggregate
2018
contractual cash rent due to us from Kindred was approximately
$122.0 million
, and the current aggregate contractual base rent (computed in accordance with GAAP) due to us from Kindred was approximately
$122.7 million
.
8
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2017
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
269
consolidated seniors housing communities, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements.
Most of our management agreements with Atria have initial terms expiring either July 31, 2024 or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic
ten
-year renewal periods. The management fees payable to Atria under most of the Atria management agreements range from
4.5%
to
5%
of revenues generated by the applicable properties, and Atria can earn up to an additional
1%
of revenues based on the achievement of specified performance targets.
Most of our management agreements with Sunrise have terms ranging from 25 to 30 years (which commenced as early as 2004 and as recently as 2012). The base management fees payable to Sunrise on consolidated assets under the Sunrise management agreements generally range from 5% to 7% of revenues generated by the applicable properties. See “
NOTE 3—CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, we rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on our managers to set appropriate resident fees and otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under those agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership or any adverse developments in their businesses or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” and “—
We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed
” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our
34%
ownership interest in Atria entitles us to certain rights and minority protections, as well as the right to appoint
two
of
six
members on the Atria Board of Directors.
Competition
We generally compete for investments in seniors housing and healthcare assets with publicly traded, private and non-listed healthcare REITs, real estate partnerships, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders and other investors, including developers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, government-sponsored entities and private equity firms, some of whom may have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we do. Increased competition challenges our ability to identify and successfully capitalize on opportunities that meet our objectives, which is affected by, among other factors, the availability of suitable acquisition or investment targets, our ability to negotiate acceptable transaction terms and our access to and cost of capital. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
Our ongoing strategy depends, in part, upon future investments in and acquisitions of, or our development or redevelopment of, seniors housing and healthcare assets, and we may not be successful in identifying and consummating these transactions
” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and “
NOTE 10—SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND OTHER DEBT
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our tenants, operators and managers also compete on a local and regional basis with other healthcare operating companies that provide comparable services. Seniors housing community, SNF and health systems operators compete to attract and retain residents and patients to our properties based on scope and quality of care, reputation and financial condition, price, location and physical appearance of the properties, services offered, qualified personnel, physician referrals and family preferences. With respect to MOBs, we and our third-party managers compete to attract and retain tenants based on many of the same factors, in addition to quality of the affiliated health system, physician preferences and proximity to hospital campuses. The ability of our tenants, operators and managers to compete successfully could be affected by private, federal and state reimbursement programs and other laws and regulations. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
Our tenants, operators and managers may be adversely affected by healthcare regulation and enforcement
” and “—
Changes in the reimbursement rates or methods of payment from third-party payors, including insurance companies and the Medicare and
9
Medicaid programs, could have a material adverse effect on certain of our tenants and operators and on us
” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Employees
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
493
employees, none of which is subject to a collective bargaining agreement. We believe that relations with our employees are positive.
Insurance
We maintain or require in our lease, management and other agreements that our tenants, operators and managers maintain all applicable lines of insurance on our properties and their operations. We believe that the amount and scope of insurance coverage provided by our policies and the policies required to be maintained by our tenants, operators and managers are customary for similarly situated companies in our industry. Although we regularly monitor our tenants’, operators’ and managers’ compliance with their respective insurance requirements, we cannot assure you that they will maintain the required insurance coverages, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by our tenants, operators and managers to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. We also cannot assure you that we will continue to require the same levels of insurance coverage under our lease, management and other agreements, that such insurance coverage will be available at a reasonable cost in the future or that the policies maintained will fully cover all losses related to our properties upon the occurrence of a catastrophic event, nor can we assure you of the future financial viability of the insurers.
We maintain the property insurance for all of our senior living operations, as well as the general and professional liability insurance for our seniors housing communities and related operations managed by Atria. However, Sunrise maintains the general and professional liability insurance for our seniors housing communities and related operations that it manages in accordance with the terms of our management agreements. Under our management agreements with Sunrise, we may elect, on an annual basis, whether we or Sunrise will bear responsibility for maintaining the required insurance coverage for the applicable properties, but the costs of such insurance are facility expenses paid from the revenues of those properties, regardless of who maintains the insurance.
Through our office operations, we provide engineering, construction and architectural services in connection with new development projects, and any design, construction or systems failures related to the properties we develop could result in substantial injury or damage to our clients or third parties. Any such injury or damage claims may arise in the ordinary course and may be asserted with respect to ongoing or completed projects. Although we maintain liability insurance to protect us against these claims, if any claim results in a loss, we cannot assure you that our policy limits would be adequate to cover the loss in full. If we sustain losses in excess of our insurance coverage, we may be required to pay the difference and we could lose our investment in, or experience reduced profits and cash flows from, the affected MOB or life science and innovation center, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
For various reasons, including to reduce and manage costs, many healthcare companies utilize different organizational and corporate structures coupled with self-insurance trusts or captive programs that may provide less coverage than a traditional insurance policy. As a result, companies that self-insure could incur large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations. The implementation of a trust or captive by any of our tenants, operators or managers could adversely affect such person’s ability to satisfy its obligations under, or otherwise comply with the terms of, its respective lease, management and other agreements with us, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Likewise, if we decide to implement a captive or self-insurance program, any large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses that we incur could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Additional Information
We maintain a website at www.ventasreit.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and our web address is included as an inactive textual reference only.
We make available, free of charge, through our website our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. In addition, our Guidelines on Governance, our Global Code of Ethics and Business Conduct (including waivers from and amendments to that document) and the charters for each of our Audit and Compliance, Nominating and Corporate Governance and Executive Compensation Committees are available on our website, and we will mail copies of the foregoing documents to
10
stockholders, free of charge, upon request to our Corporate Secretary at Ventas, Inc., 353 North Clark Street, Suite 3300, Chicago, Illinois 60654.
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATION
Healthcare Regulation
Overview
Our tenants, operators and managers are typically subject to extensive and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to quality of care, licensure and certificate of need, government reimbursement, fraud and abuse practices, qualifications of personnel, adequacy of plant and equipment, and other laws and regulations governing the operation of healthcare facilities. Healthcare is a highly regulated industry and that trend will, in general, continue in the future. The applicable rules are wide-ranging and can subject our tenants, operators and managers to civil, criminal, and administrative sanctions, including: the possible loss of accreditation or license; denial of reimbursement; imposition of fines; suspension, decertification, or exclusion from federal and state healthcare programs; or facility closure. Changes in laws or regulations, reimbursement policies, enforcement activity and regulatory non-compliance by tenants, operators and managers can all have a significant effect on their operations and financial condition, which in turn may adversely impact us, as detailed below and set forth under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
In 2017, Congress came within a single vote of repealing of the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”) and substantially reducing funding to the Medicaid program. Short of full repeal, new legislation is likely to be introduced to seek similar changes in 2018. Beyond this, significant changes to commercial health insurance and government sponsored insurance (i.e. Medicare and Medicaid) remain possible. Commercial and government payors, are likely to continue imposing greater discounts and more stringent cost controls upon operators, through changes in reimbursement rates and methodologies, discounted fee structures, the assumption by healthcare providers of all or a portion of the financial risk or otherwise. A shift toward less comprehensive health insurance coverage and increased consumer cost-sharing on health expenditures could have a material adverse effect on certain of our operators’ liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and, in turn, their ability to satisfy their contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
Licensure, Certification and CONs
In general, the operators of our inpatient rehabilitation and long-term acute care facilities, health systems and skilled nursing facilities (collectively “healthcare facilities”) must be licensed and periodically certified through various regulatory agencies that determine compliance with federal, state and local laws to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Legal requirements pertaining to such licensure and certification relate to the quality of medical care provided by the operator, qualifications of the operator’s administrative personnel and clinical staff, adequacy of the physical plant and equipment and continuing compliance with applicable laws and regulations. A loss of licensure or certification could adversely affect a healthcare facility operator’s ability to receive payments from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which, in turn, could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its obligations to us.
In addition, many of our healthcare facilities are subject to state certificate of need (“CON”) laws that require governmental approval prior to the development or expansion of healthcare facilities and services. The approval process in these states generally requires a facility to demonstrate the need for additional or expanded healthcare facilities or services. CONs, where applicable, are also sometimes necessary for changes in ownership or control of licensed facilities, addition of beds, investment in major capital equipment, introduction of new services or termination of services previously approved through the CON process. CON laws and regulations may restrict an operator’s ability to expand our properties and grow its business in certain circumstances, which could have an adverse effect on the operator’s revenues and, in turn, its ability to make rental payments under and otherwise comply with the terms of our leases. See “Risk Factors-Risks Arising from Our Business-
If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
State CON laws remained largely unchanged in 2017, with the exception of North Carolina. North Carolina’s CON statute, underwent minor changes in 2017 by exempting from CON review new institutional health services involving the acquisition of an unlicensed adult care home that was previously licensed.
11
Compared to healthcare facilities, seniors housing communities (other than those that receive Medicaid payments) do not receive significant funding from governmental healthcare programs and are subject to relatively few, if any, federal regulations. Instead, to the extent they are regulated, such regulation consists primarily of state and local laws governing licensure, provision of services, staffing requirements and other operational matters, which vary greatly from one jurisdiction to another. Although recent growth in the U.S. seniors housing industry has attracted the attention of various federal agencies that believe more federal regulation of these properties is necessary, Congress thus far has deferred to state regulation of seniors housing communities. However, as a result of this growth and increased federal scrutiny, some states have revised and strengthened their regulation of seniors housing communities, and more states are expected to do the same in the future.
As discussed in greater detail below, a number of states have instituted Medicaid waiver programs that blend the functions of healthcare and custodial care providers, and expand the scope of services that can be provided under certain licenses. The trend toward this kind of experimentation is likely to continue, and even hasten, under Republican leadership. The temporary and experimental nature of these programs means that states will also continue to adjust their licensing and certification processes which might result in some providers facing increased competition and others facing new requirements.
Fraud and Abuse Enforcement
Healthcare facilities and seniors housing communities that receive Medicaid payments are subject to various complex federal, state and local laws and regulations that govern healthcare providers' relationships and arrangements and prohibit fraudulent and abusive business practices. These laws and regulations include, among others:
•
Federal and state false claims acts, which, among other things, prohibit healthcare providers from filing false claims or making false statements to receive payment from Medicare, Medicaid or other governmental healthcare programs;
•
Federal and state anti-kickback and fee-splitting statutes, including the Medicare and Medicaid anti-kickback statute, which prohibit the payment, receipt or solicitation of any remuneration to induce referrals of patients for items or services covered by a governmental healthcare program, including Medicare and Medicaid;
•
Federal and state physician self-referral laws, including the federal Stark Law, which generally prohibits physicians from referring patients enrolled in certain governmental healthcare programs to providers of certain designated health services in which the referring physician or an immediate family member of the referring physician has an ownership or other financial interest;
•
The federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which authorizes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to impose civil penalties administratively for fraudulent acts; and
•
State and federal data privacy and security laws, including the privacy and security rules of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, which provide for the privacy and security of certain individually identifiable health information.
Violating these healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations may result in criminal and civil penalties, such as punitive sanctions, damage assessments, monetary penalties, imprisonment, denial of Medicare and Medicaid payments, and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. The responsibility for enforcing these laws and regulations lies with a variety or federal, state and local governmental agencies, however many of the laws and regulations can also be enforced by private litigants through federal and state false claims acts and other laws that allow private individuals to bring whistleblower suits known as
qui tam
actions.
Congress has significantly increased funding to the governmental agencies charged with enforcing the healthcare fraud and abuse laws to facilitate increased audits, investigations and prosecutions of providers suspected of healthcare fraud. As a result, government investigations and enforcement actions brought against healthcare providers have increased significantly in recent years and are expected to continue. A violation of federal or state anti-fraud and abuse laws or regulations by an operator of our properties could have a material adverse effect on the operator’s liquidity, financial condition or results of operations, which could adversely affect its ability to satisfy its contractual obligations, including making rental payments under and otherwise complying with the terms of our leases.
The current presidential administration has signaled it will expand current efforts to enforce healthcare fraud and abuse laws by increasing funding for the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control program. Additionally, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has stated that he will make it a high priority to prosecute fraud in federal claims while the administrator of the Centers for
12
Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), Seema Verma, has underscored this administration’s focus on healthcare fraud, stating that she will ensure that efforts preventing fraud and abuse are a priority. Further, many state Medicaid programs continue to devote additional resources to fraud, waste, and abuse initiatives. Medicaid reform plans might include lowering the growth rate of Medicaid spending, which will put pressure on states to exert greater scrutiny over the utilization of services. It is likely that states will have increased flexibility and incentive to monitor utilization patterns and take action against outlier providers.
Medicare’s fraud, waste, and abuse initiatives are also being retooled by the current presidential administration. Because a backlog of provider appeals in response to Medicare audits, CMS finalized significant changes intended to expedite the Medicare appeals process in 2017, particularly at the administrative law judge level of review. These changes apply to appeals of payment and coverage determinations for items and services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries, enrollees in Medicare Advantage and other Medicare competitive health plans, and enrollees in Medicare prescription drug plans, as well as to appeals of enrollment and entitlement determinations, and certain premium appeals. The Recovery Audit Contractor program, which has recovered more than $2 billion for the Medicare program, also continues to be controversial and may be modified under the new administration.
Reimbursement
The majority of SNF reimbursement, and a significant percentage of health system, IRF and LTAC reimbursement, is through Medicare and Medicaid. Medical buildings and other healthcare related properties have provider tenants that participate in Medicare and Medicaid. These programs are often their largest source of funding. Seniors housing communities generally do not receive funding from Medicare or Medicaid, but their ability to retain their residents is impacted by policy decisions and initiatives established by the administrators of Medicare and Medicaid. The passage of the ACA in 2010 allowed formerly uninsured Americans to acquire coverage and utilize additional health care services. In addition, the ACA gave new authorities to implement Medicaid waiver and pilot programs that impact healthcare and long term custodial care reimbursement by Medicare and Medicaid. These activities promote “aging in place”, allowing senior citizens to stay longer in seniors housing communities, and diverting or delaying their admission into SNFs. The potential risks that accompany these regulatory and market changes are discussed below.
•
As a result of the ACA, and specifically Medicaid expansion and establishment of health insurance exchanges providing subsidized health insurance, an estimated seventeen million more Americans have health insurance than in 2010. These newly-insured Americans utilize services delivered by providers at medical buildings and other healthcare facilities. The current presidential administration and Republican-controlled Congress nearly repealed the ACA in 2017 and remain committed to repealing the ACA and replacing it with a less federalized model for providing health insurance to individuals and families unable to purchase health insurance on their own. The details of the replacement model are not yet known, but potential end results could be fewer insured individuals and families or individuals and families maintaining less comprehensive insurance coverage. Outside of ACA repeal, Republicans leaders, particularly in the House of Representatives, are committed to pursuing entitlement reforms in 2018 that could lower funding to major federal programs, particularly Medicaid and lessen the number of people covered by these programs. Even without legislation, the current presidential administration has issued regulations that may lessen the number of people who purchase ACA-compliant health insurance, which has the potential to provide less protection to people coping with expensive health conditions. Any of these outcomes could adversely impact the resources of our operators.
•
Enabled by the Medicare Modernization Act (2003) and subsequent laws, Medicare and Medicaid have implemented pilot programs (officially termed demonstrations or models) to “divert” elderly from SNFs and promote “aging in place” in “the least restrictive environment.” Several states have implemented home and community-based Medicaid waiver programs that increase the support services available to senior citizens in senior housing, lengthening the time that many seniors can live outside of a SNF. These Medicaid waiver programs are subject to re-approval and pilots are time-limited. The current presidential administration is not necessarily opposed to these efforts, but is committed to giving states greater control of their Medicaid programs. The result could be the modification or curtailment of a number of existing pilots.
•
CMS is currently in the midst of transitioning Medicare from a traditional fee-for-service reimbursement model to capitated and value-based approaches in which the government pays a set amount for each beneficiary for a defined period of time, based on that person’s underlying medical needs, rather than the actual services provided. The result is increasing use of management tools to oversee individual providers and coordinate their services. This puts downward pressure on the number and expense of services provided. Roughly 10 million Medicare beneficiaries now receive care via accountable care organizations, and another 19 million are enrolled in Medicare
13
Advantage health plans. The continued trend toward capitated and value-based approaches - particularly Medicare Advantage, which is expected to grow under the current presidential administration - has the potential to diminish the market for certain healthcare providers, particularly specialist physicians and providers of particular diagnostic technologies such as medical resonance imaging services. This could adversely impact the medical properties that house these physicians and medical technology providers.
•
The majority of Medicare payments continue to be made through traditional Medicare Part A and Part B fee-for-service schedules. Medicare’s payment regulations, particularly with respect to certain hospitals, skilled nursing care, and home health services have resulted in lower net pay increases than providers of those services often desire. In addition, the Medicare and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) of 2015 establishes a multi-year transition into pay-for-quality approaches for Medicare physicians and other providers. This will include payment reductions for providers who do not meet government quality standards. The implementation of pay-for-quality models is expected to produce funding disparities that could adversely impact some provider tenants in MOBs and other health care properties. The current presidential administration has made public comments about protecting Medicare generally and improving Medicare and MACRA for healthcare providers, but few specifics are known at this time. A negative payment update in 2017 for home health reimbursement demonstrates that the current presidential administration, regardless of public statements, may take actions adverse to certain provider types.
For the year ended
December 31, 2017
, approximately
8.4%
of our total revenues and
14.5%
of our total NOI (in each case excluding amounts in discontinued operations) were attributable to healthcare facilities in which our third-party tenants receive reimbursement for their services under governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. We are neither a participant in, nor a direct recipient of, any reimbursement under these programs with respect to those leased facilities.
Life Science and Innovation Centers
In 2016, we entered the life science and innovation (“life science”) sector through the acquisitions of substantially all of the university affiliated life science real estate assets of Wexford Science & Technology, LLC from affiliates of Blackstone Real Estate Partners VIII, L.P. The life science tenants of these assets are largely university-affiliated organizations. These university-affiliated life science tenants are dependent on government funding to varying degrees. Creating a new pharmaceutical product or medical device requires substantial investments of time and capital, in part because of the extensive regulation of the healthcare industry; it also entails considerable risk of failure in demonstrating that the product is safe and effective and in gaining regulatory approval and market acceptance. Therefore, our tenants in the life science industry face high levels of regulation, expense and uncertainty.
Some of our life sciences tenants require significant outlays of funds for the research, development and clinical testing of their products and technologies. If private investors, the federal government or other sources of funding are unavailable to support such activities, a tenant’s life sciences operation may be adversely affected or fail. Further, the research, development, clinical testing, manufacture and marketing of some of our tenants’ products requires federal, state and foreign regulatory approvals which may be costly or difficult to obtain. Even after a life sciences tenant gains regulatory approval and market acceptance for a product, the product may still present significant regulatory and liability risks, including, among others, the possible later discovery of safety concerns, competition from new products and the expiration of patent protection for the product. Our tenants with marketable products may be adversely affected by healthcare reform and government reimbursement policies, including changes under the current presidential administration or by private healthcare payors. Likewise, our tenants may be unable to adequately protect their intellectual property under patent, copyright or trade secret laws. If our life sciences tenants’ businesses are adversely affected, they may have difficulty making payments to us, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Environmental Regulation
As an owner of real property, we are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding environmental, health and safety matters.
These laws and regulations address, among other things, asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, fuel oil management, wastewater discharges, air emissions, radioactive materials, medical wastes, and hazardous wastes, and, in certain cases, the costs of complying with these laws and regulations and the penalties for non-compliance can be substantial. With respect to our properties that are operated or managed by third parties, we may be held primarily or jointly and severally liable for costs relating to the investigation and clean-up of any property from which there is or has been an actual or threatened release of a regulated material and any other affected properties, regardless of whether we knew of or caused the release. Such costs typically are not limited by law or regulation and could exceed the property’s value. In addition, we may be liable for certain
14
other costs, such as governmental fines and injuries to persons, property or natural resources, as a result of any such actual or threatened release. See “Risk Factors-Risks Arising from Our Business-
We could incur substantial liabilities and costs if any of our properties are found to be contaminated with hazardous substances or we become involved in any environmental disputes
” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Under the terms of our lease, management and other agreements, we generally have a right to indemnification by the tenants, operators and managers of our properties for any contamination caused by them. However, we cannot assure you that our tenants, operators and managers will have the financial capability or willingness to satisfy their respective indemnification obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness to do so may require us to satisfy the underlying environmental claims.
In general, we have also agreed to indemnify our tenants and operators against any environmental claims (including penalties and clean-up costs) resulting from any condition arising in, on or under, or relating to, the leased properties at any time before the applicable lease commencement date. With respect to our senior living operating portfolio, we have agreed to indemnify our managers against any environmental claims (including penalties and clean- up costs) resulting from any condition on those properties, unless the manager caused or contributed to that condition.
We did not make any material capital expenditures in connection with environmental, health, and safety laws, ordinances and regulations in
2017
and do not expect that we will be required to make any such material capital expenditures during
2018
.
Canada
In Canada, seniors housing communities are currently generally subject to significantly less regulation than skilled nursing facilities and hospitals, and the regulation of such facilities is principally a matter of provincial and municipal jurisdiction. As a result, the regulatory regimes that apply to seniors housing communities vary depending on the province (and in certain circumstances, the city) in which a facility is located. Recently, certain Canadian provinces have taken steps to implement regulatory measures that could result in enhanced regulation for seniors housing communities in such provinces.
ITEM 1A. Risk Factors
This section discusses the most significant factors that affect our business, operations and financial condition. It does not describe all risks and uncertainties applicable to us, our industry or ownership of our securities. If any of the following risks, or any other risks and uncertainties that are not addressed below or that we have not yet identified, actually occur, we could be materially adversely affected and the value of our securities could decline.
We have grouped these risk factors into three general categories:
•
Risks arising from our business;
•
Risks arising from our capital structure; and
•
Risks arising from our status as a REIT.
Risks Arising from Our Business
The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
.
As of
December 31, 2017
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, managed
273
of our seniors housing communities pursuant to long-term management agreements. These properties represent a substantial portion of our portfolio, based on their gross book value, and account for a significant portion of our revenues and NOI. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, we rely on Atria’s and Sunrise’s personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations. We also rely on Atria and Sunrise to set appropriate resident fees, to provide accurate property-level financial results for our properties in a timely manner and to otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. For example, we depend on Atria’s and Sunrise’s ability to attract and retain skilled management personnel who are responsible for the day-to-day operations of our seniors housing communities. A shortage of nurses or other trained personnel or general inflationary pressures may force Atria or Sunrise to enhance its pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel, but it may not be able to offset these added costs by increasing the
15
rates charged to residents. Any increase in labor costs and other property operating expenses, any failure by Atria or Sunrise to attract and retain qualified personnel, or significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership could adversely affect the income we receive from our seniors housing communities and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, any adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could impair its ability to manage our properties efficiently and effectively and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. If Atria or Sunrise experiences any significant financial, legal, accounting or regulatory difficulties due to a weak economy or otherwise, such difficulties could result in, among other adverse events, acceleration of its indebtedness, impairment of its continued access to capital, the enforcement of default remedies by its counterparties, or the commencement of insolvency proceedings by or against it under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, any one or a combination of which indirectly could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our leases and other agreements with Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
.
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred account for a significant portion of our revenues and NOI, and we depend on Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred to pay all insurance, taxes, utilities and maintenance and repair expenses in connection with the leased properties and properties that are collateral for the loans. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, any failure by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to effectively conduct its operations or to maintain and improve such properties could adversely affect its business reputation and its ability to attract and retain patients and residents in such properties, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred have agreed to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless from and against various claims, litigation and liabilities arising in connection with their respective businesses, and we cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will have sufficient assets, income, access to financing and insurance coverage to enable them to satisfy their respective indemnification obligations.
We face potential adverse consequences from the bankruptcy, insolvency or financial deterioration of one or more of our tenants, operators, borrowers, managers and other obligors.
We lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. We are also a direct or indirect lender to various tenants and operators. We have very limited control over the success or failure of our tenants’ and operators’ businesses and, at any time, a tenant or operator may experience a downturn in its business that weakens its financial condition. If that happens, the tenant or operator may fail to make its payments to us when due. Although our lease, loan and management agreements give us the right to exercise certain remedies in the event of default on the obligations owing to us, we may determine not to do so if we believe that enforcement of our rights would be more detrimental to our business than seeking alternative approaches.
A downturn in any of our tenants’ or operators’ businesses could ultimately lead to bankruptcy if it is unable to timely resolve the underlying causes, which may be largely outside of its control. Bankruptcy and insolvency laws afford certain rights to a party that has filed for bankruptcy or reorganization that may render certain of these remedies unenforceable, or, at the least, delay our ability to pursue such remedies and realize any recoveries in connection therewith. For example, we cannot evict a tenant or operator solely because of its bankruptcy filing.
A debtor-lessee may reject our lease in a bankruptcy proceeding, in which case our claim against the debtor-lessee for unpaid and future rents would be limited by the statutory cap of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This statutory cap could be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed under the lease, and any claim we have for unpaid rent might not be paid in full. In addition, a debtor-lessee may assert in a bankruptcy proceeding that our lease should be re-characterized as a financing agreement, in which case our rights and remedies as a lender, compared to a landlord, generally would be more limited. If a debtor-manager seeks bankruptcy protection, the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code would preclude us from enforcing our remedies against the manager unless relief is first obtained from the court having jurisdiction over the bankruptcy case. In any of these events, we also may be required to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, debt costs and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of our properties, avoid the imposition of liens on our properties or transition our properties to a new tenant, operator or manager.
Bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings may also result in increased costs to the operator and significant management distraction. If we are unable to transition affected properties, they could experience prolonged operational disruption, leading to lower occupancy rates and further depressed revenues. Publicity about the operator’s financial condition and insolvency
16
proceedings may also negatively impact their and our reputations, decreasing customer demand and revenues. Any or all of these risks could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. These risks would be magnified where we lease multiple properties to a single operator under a master lease, as an operator failure or default under a master lease would expose us to these risks across multiple properties.
We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed
.
We are parties to long-term management agreements pursuant to which Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
273
of our seniors housing communities as of
December 31, 2017
. Most of our management agreements with Atria have terms expiring either July 31, 2024 or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic ten-year renewal periods, and our management agreements with Sunrise have terms ranging from 25 to 30 years (which commenced as early as 2004 and as recently as 2012). Our ability to terminate these long-term management agreements is limited to specific circumstances set forth in the agreements and may relate to all properties or a specific property or group of properties.
We may terminate any of our Atria management agreements upon the occurrence of an event of default by Atria in the performance of a material covenant or term thereof (including, in certain circumstances, the revocation of any license or certificate necessary for operation), subject in most cases to Atria’s right to cure such default, or upon the occurrence of certain insolvency events relating to Atria. In addition, we may terminate our management agreements with Atria based on the failure to achieve certain NOI targets or upon the payment of a fee.
Similarly, we may terminate any of our Sunrise management agreements upon the occurrence of an event of default by Sunrise in the performance of a material covenant or term thereof (including, in certain circumstances, the revocation of any license or certificate necessary for operation), subject in most cases to Sunrise’s right to cure such default, or upon the occurrence of certain insolvency events relating to Sunrise. We also may terminate most of our management agreements with Sunrise based on the failure to achieve certain NOI targets or to comply with certain expense control covenants, subject to certain rights of Sunrise to make cure payments to us, and upon the occurrence of certain other events or the existence of certain other conditions.
We continually monitor and assess our contractual rights and remedies under our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise. When determining whether to pursue any existing or future rights or remedies under those agreements, including termination rights, we consider numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations. In the event that we exercise our rights to terminate the Atria or Sunrise management agreements for any reason or such agreements are not renewed upon expiration of their terms, we would attempt to reposition the affected properties with another manager. Although we believe that many qualified national and regional seniors housing operators would be interested in managing our seniors housing communities, we cannot assure you that we would be able to locate another suitable manager or, if we are successful in locating such a manager, that it would manage the properties effectively. Moreover, the transition to a replacement manager would require approval by the applicable regulatory authorities and, in most cases, the mortgage lenders for the properties, and we cannot assure you that such approvals would be granted on a timely basis, if at all. Any inability to replace, or a lengthy delay in replacing, Atria or Sunrise as the manager of our seniors housing communities following termination or non-renewal of the applicable management agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
.
We cannot predict whether our tenants will renew existing leases beyond their current term. If our leases with Brookdale Senior Living or Ardent, the Kindred master leases or any of our other triple-net leases are not renewed, we would attempt to reposition those properties with another tenant or operator. In case of non-renewal, we generally have one year prior to expiration of the lease term to arrange for repositioning of the properties and our tenants are required to continue to perform all of their obligations (including the payment of all rental amounts) for the non-renewed assets until such expiration. However, following expiration of a lease term or if we exercise our right to replace a tenant or operator in default, rental payments on the related properties could decline or cease altogether while we reposition the properties with a suitable replacement tenant or operator. We also might not be successful in identifying suitable replacements or entering into leases or other arrangements with new tenants or operators on a timely basis or on terms as favorable to us as our current leases, if at all, and we may be required to fund certain expenses and obligations (e.g., real estate taxes, debt costs and maintenance expenses) to preserve the value of, and avoid the imposition of liens on, our properties while they are being repositioned. In addition, we may incur certain obligations and liabilities, including obligations to indemnify the replacement tenant or operator, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
17
In the event of non-renewal or a tenant default, our ability to reposition our properties with a suitable replacement tenant or operator could be significantly delayed or limited by state licensing, receivership, CON or other laws, as well as by the Medicare and Medicaid change-of-ownership rules, and we could incur substantial additional expenses in connection with any licensing, receivership or change-of-ownership proceedings. Our ability to locate and attract suitable replacement tenants also could be impaired by the specialized healthcare uses or contractual restrictions on use of the properties, and we may be forced to spend substantial amounts to adapt the properties to other uses. Any such delays, limitations and expenses could adversely impact our ability to collect rent, obtain possession of leased properties or otherwise exercise remedies for tenant default and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Moreover, in connection with certain of our properties, we have entered into intercreditor agreements with the tenants’ lenders or tri-party agreements with our lenders. Our ability to exercise remedies under the applicable leases or management agreements or to reposition the applicable properties may be significantly delayed or limited by the terms of the intercreditor agreement or tri-party agreement. Any such delay or limit on our rights and remedies could adversely affect our ability to mitigate our losses and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Merger and acquisition activity or consolidation in the seniors housing and healthcare industries resulting in a change of control of, or a competitor’s investment in, one or more of our tenants, operators or managers could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The seniors housing and healthcare industries have recently experienced increased consolidation, including among owners of real estate and care providers. We compete with other healthcare REITs, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders, real estate partnerships, banks, insurance companies, private equity firms and other investors that pursue a variety of investments, which may include investments in our tenants, operators or managers. A competitor’s investment in one of our tenants, operators or managers could enable our competitor to influence that tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s business and strategy in a manner that impairs our relationship with the tenant, operator or manager or is otherwise adverse to our interests. Depending on our contractual agreements and the specific facts and circumstances, we may have the right to consent to, or otherwise exercise rights and remedies, including termination rights, on account of, a competitor’s investment in, a change of control of, or other transactions impacting a tenant, operator or manager. In deciding whether to exercise our rights and remedies, including termination rights, we assess numerous factors, including legal, contractual, regulatory, business and other relevant considerations. In addition, in connection with any change of control of a tenant, operator or manager, the tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s management team may change, which could lead to a change in the tenant’s, operator’s or manager’s strategy or adversely affect the business of the tenant, operator or manager, either of which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Market conditions, including, but not limited to, interest rates and credit spreads, the availability of credit and the actual and perceived state of the real estate markets and public capital markets generally could negatively impact our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
The markets in which we operate are affected by a number of factors that are largely beyond our control but may nevertheless have a significant negative impact on us. These factors include, but are not limited to:
•
Interest rates and credit spreads;
•
The availability of credit, including the price, terms and conditions under which it can be obtained; and
•
The actual and perceived state of the real estate market, the market for dividend-paying stocks and public capital markets in general.
In addition, increased inflation may have a pronounced negative impact on the interest expense we pay in connection with our outstanding indebtedness and our general and administrative expenses, as these costs could increase at a rate higher than our rents.
Deflation may result in a decline in general price levels, often caused by a decrease in the supply of money or credit. The predominant effects of deflation are high unemployment, credit contraction and weakened consumer demand. Restricted lending practices may impact our ability to obtain financing for our properties, which could adversely impact our growth and profitability.
Our ongoing strategy depends, in part, upon future investments in and acquisitions of, or our development or redevelopment of, seniors housing and healthcare assets, and we may not be successful in identifying and consummating these transactions
.
An important part of our business strategy is to continue to expand and diversify our portfolio through accretive acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment opportunities in domestic and international seniors housing and healthcare properties. Our execution of this strategy by successfully identifying, securing and consummating beneficial transactions is made more challenging by increased competition and can be affected by many factors, including our
18
relationships with current and prospective clients, our ability to obtain debt and equity capital at costs comparable to or better than our competitors and lower than the yield we earn on our acquisitions or investments, and our ability to negotiate favorable terms with property owners seeking to sell and other contractual counterparties. Our competitors for these opportunities include other healthcare REITs, real estate partnerships, healthcare providers, healthcare lenders and other investors, including developers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds, government-sponsored entities and private equity firms, some of whom may have greater financial resources and lower costs of capital than we do. See “Business—Competition” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. If we are unsuccessful at identifying and capitalizing on investment, acquisition, development and redevelopment opportunities, our growth and profitability may be adversely affected.
Investments in and acquisitions of seniors housing and healthcare properties entail risks associated with real estate investments generally, including risks that the investment will not achieve expected returns, that the cost estimates for necessary property improvements will prove inaccurate or that the tenant, operator or manager will fail to meet performance expectations. Investments outside the United States raise legal, economic and market risks associated with doing business in foreign countries, such as currency exchange fluctuations, costly regulatory requirements and foreign tax risks. Domestic and international real estate development and redevelopment projects present additional risks, including construction delays or cost overruns that increase expenses, the inability to obtain required zoning, occupancy and other governmental approvals and permits on a timely basis, and the incurrence of significant costs prior to completion of the project. Furthermore, healthcare properties are often highly customized and the development or redevelopment of such properties may require costly tenant-specific improvements. As a result, we cannot assure you that we will achieve the economic benefit we expect from acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment opportunities.
Our significant acquisition and investment activity presents certain risks to our business and operations.
We have made and expect to continue to make significant acquisitions and investments as part of our overall business strategy. Our significant acquisition and investment activity presents certain risks to our business and operations, including, among other things, that:
•
We may be unable to successfully integrate the operations, personnel or systems of acquired companies, maintain consistent standards, controls, policies and procedures, or realize the anticipated benefits of acquisitions and other investments within the anticipated time frame or at all;
•
We may be unable to effectively monitor and manage our expanded portfolio of properties, retain key employees or attract highly qualified new employees;
•
Projections of estimated future revenues, costs savings or operating metrics that we develop during the due diligence and integration planning process might be inaccurate;
•
Our leverage could increase or our per share financial results could decline if we incur additional debt or issue equity securities to finance acquisitions and investments;
•
Acquisitions and other new investments could divert management’s attention from our existing assets;
•
The value of acquired assets or the market price of our common stock may decline; and
•
We may be unable to continue paying dividends at the current rate.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to integrate acquisitions and investments without encountering difficulties or that any such difficulties will not have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If the liabilities we assume in connection with acquisitions, including indemnification obligations in favor of third parties, are greater than expected, or if there are unknown liabilities, our business could be materially and adversely affected.
We may assume or incur liabilities in connection with our acquisitions, including, in some cases, contingent liabilities. As we integrate these acquisitions, we may learn additional information about the sellers, the properties, their operations and their liabilities that adversely affects us, such as:
•
Liabilities relating to the clean-up or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions;
•
Unasserted claims of vendors or other persons dealing with the sellers;
•
Liabilities, claims and litigation, including indemnification obligations, whether or not incurred in the ordinary course of business, relating to periods prior to or following our acquisition;
•
Claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the sellers; and
•
Liabilities for taxes relating to periods prior to our acquisition.
19
As a result, we cannot assure you that our past or future acquisitions will be successful or will not, in fact, harm our business. Among other things, if the liabilities we assume in connection with acquisitions are greater than expected, or if we discover obligations relating to the acquired properties or businesses of which we were not aware at the time of acquisition, our business and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
In addition, we have now, and may have in the future, certain surviving indemnification obligations in favor of third parties under the terms of acquisition agreements to which we are a party. Most of these indemnification obligations will be capped as to amount and survival period, and we do not believe that these obligations will be material in the aggregate. However, there can be no assurances as to the ultimate amount of such obligations or whether such obligations will have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our future results will suffer if we do not effectively manage the expansion of our hospital and life science portfolios and operations following the acquisition of AHS and the Life Sciences Acquisition.
As a result of our acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. (“AHS”) in 2015, we entered into the general acute care hospital sector. Also, as a result of the acquisition of substantially all of the university affiliated life science real estate assets of Wexford Science & Technology, LLC (“Wexford”) in 2016 (the “Life Sciences Acquisition”), we entered into the university-affiliated life science sector. Part of our long-term business strategy involves expanding our hospital and life science portfolios through additional acquisitions and development of new properties. Both the asset management of our existing general acute care hospital and university-affiliated life science and innovation centers portfolios and such additional acquisitions and developments may involve complex challenges. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to manage our expansion opportunities, integrate new investments into our existing business in an efficient and timely manner, successfully monitor the operations, costs, regulatory compliance and service quality of our operators and leverage our relationships with Ardent and other operators of hospitals and Wexford and other operators and developers of life science and innovation centers. It is possible that our expansion or acquisition opportunities within the general acute care hospital and life science sectors will not be successful, which could adversely impact our growth and future results.
Our investments are concentrated in seniors housing and healthcare real estate, making us more vulnerable economically to adverse changes in the real estate market and the seniors housing and healthcare industries than if our investments were diversified.
We invest primarily in seniors housing and healthcare properties and are constrained by the terms of our existing indebtedness from making investments outside those industries. This investment focus exposes us to greater economic risk than if our portfolio were to include real estate assets in other industries or assets unrelated to real estate.
The healthcare industry is highly regulated, and changes in government regulation and reimbursement can have material adverse consequences on its participants, some of which may be unintended. The healthcare industry is also highly competitive, and our operators and managers may encounter increased competition for residents and patients, including with respect to the scope and quality of care and services provided, reputation and financial condition, physical appearance of the properties, price and location. Our tenants, operators and managers are large employers who compete for labor, making their results sensitive to changes in the labor market and/or wages and benefits offered to their employees. If our tenants, operators and managers are unable to successfully compete with other operators and managers by maintaining profitable occupancy and rate levels or controlling labor costs, their ability to meet their respective obligations to us may be materially adversely affected. We cannot assure you that future changes in government regulation will not adversely affect the healthcare industry, including our seniors housing and healthcare operations, tenants and operators, nor can we be certain that our tenants, operators and managers will achieve and maintain occupancy and rate levels or labor costs levels that will enable them to satisfy their obligations to us. Any adverse changes in the regulation of the healthcare industry, or the competitiveness of our tenants, operators and managers, or costs of labor, could have a more pronounced effect on us than if we had investments outside the seniors housing and healthcare industries.
Real estate investments are relatively illiquid, and our ability to quickly sell or exchange our properties in response to changes in economic or other conditions is limited. In the event we market any of our properties for sale, the value of those properties and our ability to sell at prices or on terms acceptable to us could be adversely affected by a downturn in the real estate industry or any economic weakness in the seniors housing and healthcare industries. In addition, transfers of healthcare properties may be subject to regulatory approvals that are not required for transfers of other types of commercial properties. We cannot assure you that we will recognize the full value of any property that we sell for liquidity or other reasons, and the inability to respond quickly to changes in the performance of our investments could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
20
Our operating assets expose us to various operational risks, liabilities and claims that could adversely affect our ability to generate revenues or increase our costs and could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our senior living operating assets and office assets expose us to various operational risks, liabilities and claims that could increase our costs or adversely affect our ability to generate revenues, thereby reducing our profitability. These operational risks include fluctuations in occupancy levels, the inability to achieve economic resident fees (including anticipated increases in those fees), increases in the cost of food, materials, energy, labor (as a result of unionization or otherwise) or other services, rent control regulations, national and regional economic conditions, the imposition of new or increased taxes, capital expenditure requirements, professional and general liability claims, and the availability and cost of professional and general liability insurance. Any one or a combination of these factors could result in operating deficiencies in our senior living operations or office operations reportable business segments, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our ownership of properties outside the United States exposes us to different risks than those associated with our domestic properties.
Our current or future ownership of properties outside the United States subjects us to risks that may be different or greater than those we face with our domestic properties. These risks include, but are not limited to:
•
Challenges with respect to repatriation of foreign earnings and cash;
•
Foreign ownership restrictions with respect to operations in countries in which we own properties;
•
Regional or country-specific business cycles and economic instability;
•
Challenges of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws and regulations, including those relating to real estate, corporate governance, operations, taxes, employment and legal proceedings;
•
Differences in lending practices and the willingness of domestic or foreign lenders to provide financing; and
•
Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations in the United States that affect foreign operations, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Increased construction and development in the markets in which our seniors housing communities and MOBs are located could adversely affect our future occupancy rates, operating margins and profitability.
Limited barriers to entry in the seniors housing and MOB industries could lead to the development of new seniors housing communities or MOBs that outpaces demand. Data published by the National Investment Center for Seniors Housing & Care has indicated deliveries of new seniors housing communities will remain at elevated levels in 2018, especially in certain geographic markets. If development outpaces demand for those assets in the markets in which our properties are located, those markets may become saturated and we could experience decreased occupancy, reduced operating margins and lower profitability, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
We have now, and may have in the future, exposure to contingent rent escalators, which could hinder our growth and profitability.
We derive a significant portion of our revenues from leasing properties pursuant to long-term triple-net leases that generally provide for fixed rental rates, subject to annual escalations. In certain cases, the annual escalations are contingent upon the achievement of specified revenue parameters or based on changes in CPI, with caps and floors. If, as a result of weak economic conditions or other factors, the properties subject to these leases do not generate sufficient revenue to achieve the specified rent escalation parameters or CPI does not increase, our growth and profitability may be hindered. If strong economic conditions result in significant increases in CPI, but the escalations under our leases are capped, our growth and profitability also may be limited.
We own certain properties subject to ground lease, air rights or other restrictive agreements that limit our uses of the properties, restrict our ability to sell or otherwise transfer the properties and expose us to loss of the properties if such agreements are breached by us or terminated.
Our investments in MOBs and other properties may be made through leasehold interests in the land on which the buildings are located, leases of air rights for the space above the land on which the buildings are located, or other similar restrictive arrangements. Many of these ground lease, air rights and other restrictive agreements impose significant limitations on our uses of the subject properties, restrict our ability to sell or otherwise transfer our interests in the properties or restrict the leasing of the properties. These restrictions may limit our ability to timely sell or exchange the properties, impair the properties’ value or negatively impact our ability to find suitable tenants for the properties. In addition, we could lose our interests in the subject properties if the ground lease, air rights or other restrictive agreements are breached by us or terminated.
21
We may be unable to successfully foreclose on the collateral securing our loans and other investments, and even if we are successful in our foreclosure efforts, we may be unable to successfully sell any acquired equity interests or reposition any acquired properties, which could adversely affect our ability to recover our investments.
If a borrower defaults under mortgage or other secured loans for which we are the lender, we may attempt to foreclose on the collateral securing those loans, including by acquiring any pledged equity interests or acquiring title to the subject properties, to protect our investment. In response, the defaulting borrower may contest our enforcement of foreclosure or other available remedies, seek bankruptcy protection against our exercise of enforcement or other available remedies, or bring claims against us for lender liability. If a defaulting borrower seeks bankruptcy protection, the automatic stay provisions of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code would preclude us from enforcing foreclosure or other available remedies against the borrower unless relief is first obtained from the court with jurisdiction over the bankruptcy case. In addition, we may be subject to intercreditor or tri-party agreements that delay, impact, govern or limit our ability to foreclose on a lien securing a loan or otherwise delay or limit our pursuit of our rights and remedies. Any such delay or limit on our ability to pursue our rights or remedies could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Even if we successfully foreclose on the collateral securing our mortgage loans and other investments, costs related to enforcement of our remedies, high loan-to-value ratios or declines in the value of the collateral could prevent us from realizing the full amount of our secured loans, and we could be required to record a valuation allowance for such losses. Moreover, the collateral may include equity interests that we are unable to sell due to securities law restrictions or otherwise, or properties that we are unable to reposition with new tenants or operators on a timely basis, if at all, or without making improvements or repairs. Any delay or costs incurred in selling or repositioning acquired collateral could adversely affect our ability to recover our investments.
Some of our loan investments are subordinated to loans held by third parties.
Our mezzanine loan investments are subordinated to senior secured loans held by other investors that encumber the same real estate. If a senior secured loan is foreclosed, that foreclosure would extinguish our rights in the collateral for our mezzanine loan. In order to protect our economic interest in that collateral, we would need to be prepared, on an expedited basis, to advance funds to the senior lenders in order to cure defaults under the senior secured loans and prevent such a foreclosure. If a senior secured loan has matured or has been accelerated, then in order to protect our economic interest in the collateral, we would need to be prepared, on an expedited basis, to purchase or pay off that senior secured loan, which could require an infusion of fresh capital as large or larger than our initial investment. Our ability to sell or syndicate a mezzanine loan could be limited by transfer restrictions in the intercreditor agreement with the senior secured lenders. Our ability to negotiate modifications to the mezzanine loan documents with our borrowers could be limited by restrictions on modifications in the intercreditor agreement. Since mezzanine loans are typically secured by pledges of equity rather than direct liens on real estate, our mezzanine loan investments are more vulnerable than our mortgage loan investments to losses caused by competing creditor claims, unauthorized transfers, or bankruptcies.
Our tenants, operators and managers may be adversely affected by healthcare regulation and enforcement
.
Regulation of the healthcare industry generally has intensified over time both in the number and type of regulations and in the efforts to enforce those regulations. This is particularly true for large for-profit, multi-facility providers like Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred. Federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting the healthcare industry include those relating to, among other things, licensure, conduct of operations, ownership of facilities, addition of facilities and equipment, allowable costs, services, prices for services, qualified beneficiaries, quality of care, patient rights, fraudulent or abusive behavior, financial and other arrangements that may be entered into by healthcare providers and the research, development, clinical testing, manufacture and marketing of life science products. In addition, changes in enforcement policies by federal and state governments have resulted in an increase in the number of inspections, citations of regulatory deficiencies and other regulatory sanctions, including terminations from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, bars on Medicare and Medicaid payments for new admissions, civil monetary penalties and even criminal penalties. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We are unable to predict the scope of future federal, state and local regulations and legislation, including the Medicare and Medicaid statutes and regulations, or the intensity of enforcement efforts with respect to such regulations and legislation, and any changes in the regulatory framework could have a material adverse effect on our tenants, operators and managers, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If our tenants, operators and managers fail to comply with the extensive laws, regulations and other requirements applicable to their businesses and the operation of our properties, they could become ineligible to receive reimbursement from governmental and private third-party payor programs, face bans on admissions of new patients or residents, suffer civil or criminal penalties or be required to make significant changes to their operations. Our tenants, operators and managers also
22
could face increased costs related to changes in healthcare regulation, such as the possible repeal of the ACA by the current presidential administration and Republican-controlled Congress and a shift toward less comprehensive health coverage, or be forced to expend considerable resources in responding to an investigation or other enforcement action under applicable laws or regulations. In such event, the results of operations and financial condition of our tenants, operators and managers and the results of operations of our properties operated or managed by those entities could be adversely affected, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Changes in the reimbursement rates or methods of payment from third-party payors, including insurance companies and the Medicare and Medicaid programs, could have a material adverse effect on certain of our tenants and operators and on us
.
Certain of our tenants and operators rely on reimbursement from third-party payors, including the Medicare (both traditional Medicare and "managed" Medicare/Medicare Advantage) and Medicaid programs, for substantially all of their revenues. Federal and state legislators and regulators have adopted or proposed various cost-containment measures that would limit payments to healthcare providers, and budget crises and financial shortfalls have caused states to implement or consider Medicaid rate freezes or cuts. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Private third-party payors also have continued their efforts to control healthcare costs. In addition, coverage expansions via the ACA through Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchanges may be scaled back as the current presidential administration and some members of Congress lead efforts to repeal and replace the ACA. We cannot assure you that our tenants and operators who currently depend on governmental or private payor reimbursement will be adequately reimbursed for the services they provide. Significant limits by governmental and private third-party payors on the scope of services reimbursed or on reimbursement rates and fees, whether from legislation, administrative actions or private payor efforts, could have a material adverse effect on the liquidity, financial condition and results of operations of certain of our tenants and operators, which could affect adversely their ability to comply with the terms of our leases and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The healthcare industry trend away from a traditional fee for service reimbursement model towards value-based payment approaches may negatively impact certain of our tenants’ revenues and profitability
Certain of our tenants, specifically those providers in the post-acute and general acute care hospital space, are subject to the broad trend in the healthcare industry toward value-based purchasing of healthcare services. These value-based purchasing programs include both public reporting of quality data and preventable adverse events tied to the quality and efficiency of care provided by facilities. Medicare and Medicaid require healthcare facilities, including hospitals and skilled nursing facilities, to report certain quality data to receive full reimbursement updates. In addition Medicare does not reimburse for care related to certain preventable adverse events (also called “never events”). Many large commercial payors currently require healthcare facilities to report quality data, and several commercial payors do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse events.
During the Obama administration, HHS focused on tying Medicare payments to quality or value through alternative payment models, which generally aim to make providers attentive to the total costs of treatment. Examples of alternative payment models include bundled-payment arrangements. It is unclear whether such models will successfully coordinate care and reduce costs or whether they will decrease reimbursement. The value-based purchasing trend is not limited to the public sector. Several of the nation’s largest commercial payors have also expressed an intent to increase reliance on value-based reimbursement arrangements. Further, many large commercial payors require hospitals to report quality data, and several commercial payors do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse events.
While the current presidential administration’s and some members of Congress’s desire to repeal the ACA creates unpredictability, we expect value-based purchasing programs, including programs that condition reimbursement on patient outcome measures, to become more common and to involve a higher percentage of reimbursement amounts. We are unable at this time to predict how this trend will affect the revenues and profitability of those of our tenants who are providers of healthcare services; however, if this trend significantly and adversely affects their profitability, it could in turn negatively affect their ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us and or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
If controls imposed on certain of our tenants who provide healthcare services that are reimbursed by Medicare, Medicaid and other third-party payors to reduce admissions and length of stay affect inpatient volumes at our healthcare facilities, the financial condition or results of operations of those tenants could be adversely affected.
Controls imposed by Medicare, Medicaid and commercial third-party payors designed to reduce admissions and lengths of stay, commonly referred to as “utilization reviews,” have affected and are expected to continue to affect certain of
23
our healthcare facilities, specifically our acute care hospitals and post-acute facilities. Utilization review entails the review of the admission and course of treatment of a patient by managed care plans. Inpatient utilization, average lengths of stay and occupancy rates continue to be negatively affected by payor-required preadmission authorization and utilization review and by payor pressures to maximize outpatient and alternative healthcare delivery services for less acutely ill patients. Efforts to impose more stringent cost controls and reductions are expected to continue, which could negatively impact the financial condition of our tenants who provide healthcare services in our hospitals and post-acute facilities. If so, this could adversely affect these tenants’ ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us and or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The implementation of new patient criteria for LTACs will change the basis upon which certain of our tenants are reimbursed by Medicare, which could adversely affect those tenants’ revenues and profitability.
As part of the Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013 enacted on December 26, 2013, Congress adopted various legislative changes impacting LTACs. These legislative changes create new Medicare criteria and payment rules for LTACs, and could have a material adverse impact on the revenues and profitability of the tenants of our LTACs. This material adverse impact could, in turn, negatively affect those tenants’ ability and willingness to comply with the terms of their leases with us or renew those leases upon expiration, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
The hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their affiliated health systems could fail to remain competitive or financially viable, which could adversely impact their ability to attract physicians and physician groups to our MOBs.
Our MOB operations depend on the competitiveness and financial viability of the hospitals on or near whose campuses our MOBs are located and their ability to attract physicians and other healthcare-related clients to our MOBs. The viability of these hospitals, in turn, depends on factors such as the quality and mix of healthcare services provided, competition for patients, physicians and physician groups, demographic trends in the surrounding community, market position and growth potential, as well as the ability of the affiliated health systems to provide economies of scale and access to capital. If a hospital on or near whose campus one of our MOBs is located fails or becomes unable to meet its financial obligations, and if an affiliated health system is unable to support that hospital, the hospital may be unable to compete successfully or could be forced to close or relocate, which could adversely impact its ability to attract physicians and other healthcare-related clients. Because we rely on proximity to and affiliations with hospitals to create leasing demand in our MOBs, a hospital’s inability to remain competitive or financially viable, or to attract physicians and physician groups, could materially adversely affect our MOB operations and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken through our joint ventures, may not yield anticipated returns.
We consider and, when appropriate, invest in various development and redevelopment projects. In deciding whether to make an investment in a particular project, we make certain assumptions regarding the expected future performance of the property. Our assumptions are subject to risks generally associated with development and redevelopment projects, including, among others, that:
•
We may be unable to obtain financing for the project on favorable terms or at all;
•
We may not complete the project on schedule or within budgeted amounts;
•
We may encounter delays in obtaining or fail to obtain all necessary zoning, land use, building, occupancy, environmental and other governmental permits and authorizations, or underestimate the costs necessary to develop or redevelop the property to market standards;
•
Construction or other delays may provide tenants or residents the right to terminate preconstruction leases or cause us to incur additional costs;
•
Volatility in the price of construction materials or labor may increase our project costs;
•
In the case of our MOB developments, hospitals or health systems may maintain significant decision-making authority with respect to the development schedule;
•
Our builders may fail to perform or satisfy the expectations of our clients or prospective clients;
•
We may incorrectly forecast risks associated with development in new geographic regions;
•
Tenants may not lease space at the quantity or rental rate levels or on the schedule projected;
•
Demand for our project may decrease prior to completion, due to competition from other developments; and
24
•
Lease rates and rents at newly developed or redeveloped properties may fluctuate based on factors beyond our control, including market and economic conditions.
If any of the risks described above occur, our development and redevelopment projects, including projects undertaken through our joint ventures, may not yield anticipated returns, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our investments in joint ventures and unconsolidated entities could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on our joint venture partners’ financial condition, any disputes that may arise between us and our joint venture partners, and our exposure to potential losses from the actions of our joint venture partners.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned
48
MOBs,
11
life science and innovation centers,
nine
seniors housing communities and
one
IRF through consolidated joint ventures, and we had
25%
ownership interests in
17
seniors housing communities,
13
SNFs and
one
MOB through investments in unconsolidated entities. In addition, we had a
34%
ownership interest in Atria and a
9.9%
interest in Ardent as of
December 31, 2017
. These joint ventures and unconsolidated entities involve risks not present with respect to our wholly owned properties, including the following:
•
We may be unable to take actions that are opposed by our joint venture partners under arrangements that require us to share decision-making authority over major decisions affecting the ownership or operation of the joint venture and any property owned by the joint venture, such as the sale or financing of the property or the making of additional capital contributions for the benefit of the property;
•
For joint ventures in which we have a noncontrolling interest, our joint venture partners may take actions that we oppose;
•
Our ability to sell or transfer our interest in a joint venture to a third party may be restricted if we fail to obtain the prior consent of our joint venture partners;
•
Our joint venture partners may become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions, which could delay construction or development of a property or increase our financial commitment to the joint venture;
•
Our joint venture partners may have business interests or goals with respect to a property that conflict with our business interests and goals, including with respect to the timing, terms and strategies for investment, which could increase the likelihood of disputes regarding the ownership, management or disposition of the property;
•
Disagreements with our joint venture partners could result in litigation or arbitration that increases our expenses, distracts our officers and directors, and disrupts the day-to-day operations of the property, including by delaying important decisions until the dispute is resolved; and
•
We may suffer losses as a result of actions taken by our joint venture partners with respect to our joint venture investments.
Events that adversely affect the ability of seniors and their families to afford daily resident fees at our seniors housing communities could cause our occupancy rates, resident fee revenues and results of operations to decline.
Assisted and independent living services generally are not reimbursable under government reimbursement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. A large majority of the resident fee revenues generated by our senior living operations, therefore, are derived from private pay sources consisting of the income or assets of residents or their family members. In light of the significant expense associated with building new properties and staffing and other costs of providing services, typically only seniors with income or assets that meet or exceed the comparable region median can afford the daily resident and care fees at our seniors housing communities, and a weak economy, depressed housing market or changes in demographics could adversely affect their continued ability to do so. If the managers of our seniors housing communities are unable to attract and retain seniors that have sufficient income, assets or other resources to pay the fees associated with assisted and independent living services, the occupancy rates, resident fee revenues and results of operations of our senior living operations could decline, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our tenants in the life science industry face high levels of regulation, expense and uncertainty.
Life science tenants, particularly those involved in developing and marketing pharmaceutical products, are subject to certain unique risks, including the following:
•
Some of our tenants require significant outlays of funds for the research and development and clinical testing of their products and technologies. The economic environment in recent years has significantly impacted the ability of these companies to access the capital markets and venture capital funding. In addition, state and federal government and university budgets have been negatively impacted by the recent economic environment and, as a result certain
25
programs, including grants related to biotechnology research and development, may be at risk of being eliminated or cut back significantly. If private investors, the government, universities, public markets or other sources of funding are unavailable to support such development, a tenant’s business may fail.
•
The research and development, clinical testing, manufacture and marketing of some of our tenants’ products require federal, state and foreign regulatory approvals. The approval process is typically long, expensive and uncertain. Even if our tenants have sufficient funds to seek approvals, one or all of their products may fail to obtain the required regulatory approvals on a timely basis or at all. Furthermore, our tenants may only have a small number of products under development. If one product fails to receive the required approvals at any stage of development, it could significantly adversely affect our tenant’s entire business and its ability to pay rent.
•
Our tenants may be unable to adequately protect their intellectual property under patent, copyright or trade secret laws. Failure to do so could jeopardize their ability to profit from their efforts and to protect their products from competition.
•
Collaborative relationships with other life science entities may be crucial to the development, manufacturing, distribution or marketing of our tenants’ products. If these other entities fail to fulfill their obligations under these collaborative arrangements, our tenants’ businesses will suffer.
•
Legislation to reform the U.S. healthcare system, including regulations and legislation relating to the ACA, may include government intervention in product pricing and other changes that adversely affect reimbursement for our tenants’ marketable products. In addition, sales of many of our tenants’ marketable products are dependent, in large part, on the availability and extent of reimbursement from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Changes in government regulations, price controls or third-party payors’ reimbursement policies may reduce reimbursement for our tenants’ marketable products and adversely impact our tenants’ businesses.
We cannot assure you that our tenants in the life science industry will be successful in their businesses. If our tenants’ businesses are adversely affected, they may have difficulty making payments to us, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The amount and scope of insurance coverage provided by our policies and policies maintained by our tenants, operators and managers may not adequately insure against losses.
We maintain or require in our lease, management and other agreements that our tenants, operators and managers maintain all applicable lines of insurance on our properties and their operations. Although we regularly review the amount and scope of insurance provided by our policies and required to be maintained by our tenants, operators and managers and believe the coverage provided to be customary for similarly situated companies in our industry, we cannot assure you that we or our tenants, operators and managers will continue to be able to maintain adequate levels of insurance. We also cannot assure you that we or our tenants, operators and managers will maintain the required coverages, that we will continue to require the same levels of insurance under our lease, management and other agreements, that such insurance will be available at a reasonable cost in the future or that the policies maintained will fully cover all losses on our properties upon the occurrence of a catastrophic event, nor can we make any guaranty as to the future financial viability of the insurers that underwrite our policies and the policies maintained by our tenants, operators and managers.
For various reasons, including to reduce and manage costs, many healthcare companies utilize different organizational and corporate structures coupled with self-insurance trusts or captive programs that may provide less insurance coverage than a traditional insurance policy. Companies that insure any part of their general and professional liability risks through their own captive limited purpose entities generally estimate the future cost of general and professional liability through actuarial studies that rely primarily on historical data. However, due to the rise in the number and severity of professional claims against healthcare providers, these actuarial studies may underestimate the future cost of claims, and reserves for future claims may not be adequate to cover the actual cost of those claims. As a result, the tenants and operators of our properties who self-insure could incur large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses, which could materially adversely affect their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and, in turn, their ability to satisfy their obligations to us. If we or the managers of our senior living operations decide to implement a captive or self-insurance program, any large funded and unfunded general and professional liability expenses incurred could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Should an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occur, we could incur substantial liability or lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenues from the property. Following the occurrence of such an event, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations
26
related to the property. We cannot assure you that material uninsured losses, or losses in excess of insurance proceeds, will not occur in the future.
Significant legal actions or regulatory proceedings could subject us or our tenants, operators and managers to increased operating costs and substantial uninsured liabilities, which could materially adversely affect our or their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.
From time to time, we may be subject to claims brought against us in lawsuits and other legal or regulatory proceedings arising out of our alleged actions or the alleged actions of our tenants, operators and managers for which such tenants, operators and managers may have agreed to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless. An unfavorable resolution of any such litigation or proceeding could materially adversely affect our or their liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
In certain cases, we and our tenants, operators and managers may be subject to professional liability claims brought by plaintiffs’ attorneys seeking significant punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. Due to the historically high frequency and severity of professional liability claims against seniors housing and healthcare providers, the availability of professional liability insurance has decreased and the premiums on such insurance coverage remain costly. As a result, insurance protection against such claims may not be sufficient to cover all claims against us or our tenants, operators or managers, and may not be available at a reasonable cost. If we or our tenants, operators and managers are unable to maintain adequate insurance coverage or are required to pay punitive damages, we or they may be exposed to substantial liabilities.
The occurrence of cyber incidents could disrupt our operations, result in the loss of confidential information and/or damage our business relationships and reputation.
As our reliance on technology has increased, our business is subject to greater risk from cyber incidents, including attempts to gain unauthorized access to our or our managers’ systems to disrupt operations, corrupt data or steal confidential information, and other electronic security breaches. While we and our managers have implemented measures to help mitigate these threats, such measures cannot guarantee that we will be successful in preventing a cyber incident. The occurrence of a cyber incident could disrupt our operations, or the operations of our managers, compromise the confidential information of our employees or the residents in our seniors housing communities, and/or damage our business relationships and reputation.
Our operators may be sued under a federal whistleblower statute.
Our operators who engage in business with the federal government may be sued under a federal whistleblower statute designed to combat fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. See “Governmental Regulation—Healthcare Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These lawsuits can involve significant monetary damages and award bounties to private plaintiffs who successfully bring these suits. If any of these lawsuits were brought against our operators, such suits combined with increased operating costs and substantial uninsured liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our operators’ liquidity, financial condition and results of operations and on their ability to satisfy their obligations under our leases, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
We could incur substantial liabilities and costs if any of our properties are found to be contaminated with hazardous substances or we become involved in any environmental disputes
.
Under federal and state environmental laws and regulations, a current or former owner of real property may be liable for costs related to the investigation, removal and remediation of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum that are released from or are present at or under, or that are disposed of in connection with such property. Owners of real property may also face other environmental liabilities, including government fines and penalties imposed by regulatory authorities and damages for injuries to persons, property or natural resources. Environmental laws and regulations often impose liability without regard to whether the owner was aware of, or was responsible for, the presence, release or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum. In certain circumstances, environmental liability may result from the activities of a current or former operator of the property. Although we generally have indemnification rights against the current operators of our properties for contamination caused by them, such indemnification may not adequately cover all environmental costs. See “Governmental Regulation—Environmental Regulation” included in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our success depends, in part, on our ability to attract and retain talented employees, and the loss of any one of our key personnel could adversely impact our business.
The success of our business depends, in part, on the leadership and performance of our executive management team and key employees, and our ability to attract, retain and motivate talented employees could significantly impact our future performance. Competition for these individuals is intense, and we cannot assure you that we will retain our key officers and
27
employees or that we will be able to attract and retain other highly qualified individuals in the future. Losing any one or more of these persons could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Failure to maintain effective internal controls could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to provide a report by management on internal control over financial reporting, including management’s assessment of the effectiveness of such control. Because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls, or fraud, effective internal controls over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatement and can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls over financial reporting and our operating internal controls, including any failure to implement required new or improved controls as a result of changes to our business or otherwise, or if we experience difficulties in their implementation, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely harmed and we could fail to meet our reporting obligations.
Economic and other conditions that negatively affect geographic locations to which a greater percentage of our NOI is attributed could adversely affect our financial results.
For the year ended
December 31, 2017
, approximately
35.6%
of our total NOI was derived from properties located in
California
(
13.9%
),
Texas
(
6.4%
),
New York
(
5.7%
),
Illinois
(
5.1%
) and
Florida
(
4.5%
). As a result, we are subject to increased exposure to adverse conditions affecting these regions, including downturns in the local economies or changes in local real estate conditions, increased construction and competition or decreased demand for our properties, regional climate events and changes in state-specific legislation, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
We may be adversely affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates.
Our ownership of properties in Canada and the United Kingdom currently subjects us to fluctuations in the exchange rates between U.S. dollars and Canadian dollars or the British pound, which may, from time to time, impact our financial condition and results of operations. If we continue to expand our international presence through investments in, or acquisitions or development of, seniors housing or healthcare assets outside the United States, Canada or the United Kingdom, we may transact business in other foreign currencies. Although we may pursue hedging alternatives, including borrowing in local currencies, to protect against foreign currency fluctuations, we cannot assure you that such fluctuations will not have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure
We may become more leveraged.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had approximately
$11.3 billion
of outstanding indebtedness. The instruments governing our existing indebtedness permit us to incur substantial additional debt, including secured debt, and we may satisfy our capital and liquidity needs through additional borrowings. A high level of indebtedness would require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to the payment of debt service, thereby reducing the funds available to implement our business strategy and make distributions to stockholders. A high level of indebtedness could also have the following consequences:
•
Potential limits on our ability to adjust rapidly to changing market conditions and vulnerability in the event of a downturn in general economic conditions or in the real estate or healthcare industries;
•
Potential impairment of our ability to obtain additional financing to execute on our business strategy; and
•
Potential downgrade in the rating of our debt securities by one or more rating agencies, which could have the effect of, among other things, limiting our access to capital and increasing our cost of borrowing.
In addition, from time to time, we mortgage certain of our properties to secure payment of indebtedness. If we are unable to meet our mortgage payments, then the encumbered properties could be foreclosed upon or transferred to the mortgagee with a resulting loss of income and asset value.
We are exposed to increases in interest rates, which could reduce our profitability and adversely impact our ability to refinance existing debt, sell assets or engage in acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment activity, and our decision to hedge against interest rate risk might not be effective.
We receive a significant portion of our revenues by leasing assets under long-term triple-net leases that generally provide for fixed rental rates subject to annual escalations, while certain of our debt obligations are floating rate obligations with interest and related payments that vary with the movement of LIBOR, Bankers’ Acceptance or other indexes. The
28
generally fixed rate nature of a significant portion of our revenues and the variable rate nature of certain of our debt obligations create interest rate risk. Although our operating assets provide a partial hedge against interest rate fluctuations, if interest rates rise, the costs of our existing floating rate debt and any new debt that we incur would increase. These increased costs could reduce our profitability, impair our ability to meet our debt obligations, or increase the cost of financing our acquisition, investment, development and redevelopment activity. An increase in interest rates also could limit our ability to refinance existing debt upon maturity or cause us to pay higher rates upon refinancing, as well as decrease the amount that third parties are willing to pay for our assets, thereby limiting our ability to promptly reposition our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions.
We may seek to manage our exposure to interest rate volatility with hedging arrangements that involve additional risks, including the risks that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements, that these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to interest rate changes, that the amount of income we earn from hedging transactions may be limited by federal tax provisions governing REITs, and that these arrangements may cause us to pay higher interest rates on our debt obligations than otherwise would be the case. Moreover, no amount of hedging activity can fully insulate us from the risks associated with changes in interest rates. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate risk, if we choose to engage in such activities, could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy
.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to raise the capital necessary to meet our debt service obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy, if our cash flow from operations is insufficient to satisfy these needs, and the failure to do so could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. Although we believe that we have sufficient access to capital and other sources of funding to meet our expected liquidity needs, we cannot assure you that conditions in the capital markets will not deteriorate or that our access to capital and other sources of funding will not become constrained, which could adversely affect the availability and terms of future borrowings, renewals or refinancings and our results of operation and financial condition. If we cannot access capital at an acceptable cost or at all, we may be required to liquidate one or more investments in properties at times that may not permit us to maximize the return on those investments or that could result in adverse tax consequences to us.
As a public company, our access to debt and equity capital depends, in part, on the trading prices of our senior notes and common stock, which, in turn, depend upon market conditions that change from time to time, such as the market’s perception of our financial condition, our growth potential and our current and expected future earnings and cash distributions. Our failure to meet the market’s expectation with regard to future earnings and cash distributions or a significant downgrade in the ratings assigned to our long-term debt could impact our ability to access capital or increase our borrowing costs. We also rely on the financial institutions that are parties to our revolving credit facilities. If these institutions become capital constrained, tighten their lending standards or become insolvent or if they experience excessive volumes of borrowing requests from other borrowers within a short period of time, they may be unable or unwilling to honor their funding commitments to us, which would adversely affect our ability to draw on our revolving credit facilities and, over time, could negatively impact our ability to consummate acquisitions, repay indebtedness as it matures, fund capital expenditures or make distributions to our stockholders.
Covenants in the instruments governing our and our subsidiaries’ existing indebtedness limit our operational flexibility, and a covenant breach could materially adversely affect our operations.
The terms of the instruments governing our existing indebtedness require us to comply with certain customary financial and other covenants, such as maintaining debt service coverage, leverage ratios and minimum net worth requirements. Our continued ability to incur additional debt and to conduct business in general is subject to our compliance with these covenants, which limit our operational flexibility. Breaches of these covenants could result in defaults under the applicable debt instruments and could trigger defaults under any of our other indebtedness that is cross-defaulted against such instruments, even if we satisfy our payment obligations. In addition, covenants contained in the instruments governing our subsidiaries’ outstanding mortgage indebtedness may restrict our ability to obtain cash distributions from such subsidiaries for the purpose of meeting our debt service obligations. Financial and other covenants that limit our operational flexibility, as well as defaults resulting from our breach of any of these covenants, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
29
Risks Arising from Our Status as a REIT
Loss of our status as a REIT would have significant adverse consequences for us and the value of our common stock.
If we lose our status as a REIT (currently or with respect to any tax years for which the statute of limitations has not expired), we will face serious tax consequences that will substantially reduce the funds available to satisfy our obligations, to implement our business strategy and to make distributions to our stockholders for each of the years involved because:
•
We would not be allowed a deduction for distributions to stockholders in computing our taxable income and would be subject to regular U.S. federal corporate income tax;
•
We could be subject to increased state and local taxes; and
•
Unless we are entitled to relief under statutory provisions, we could not elect to be subject to tax as a REIT for four taxable years following the year during which we were disqualified.
In addition, in such event we would no longer be required to pay dividends to maintain REIT status, which could adversely affect the value of our common stock.
Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) for which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations. The determination of factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control, as well as new legislation, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions, may adversely affect our investors or our ability to remain qualified as a REIT for tax purposes. In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must satisfy a number of requirements, generally including requirements regarding the ownership of our stock, requirements regarding the composition of our assets, a requirement that at least 95% of our gross income in any year must be derived from qualifying sources, and we must make distributions to our stockholders aggregating annually at least 90% of our net taxable income, excluding capital gains. Although we believe that we currently qualify as a REIT, we cannot assure you that we will continue to qualify for all future periods.
The 90% distribution requirement will decrease our liquidity and may limit our ability to engage in otherwise beneficial transactions.
To comply with the 90% distribution requirement applicable to REITs and to avoid the nondeductible excise tax, we must make distributions to our stockholders. Such distributions reduce the funds we have available to finance our investment, acquisition, development and redevelopment activity and may limit our ability to engage in transactions that are otherwise in the best interests of our stockholders.
Although we do not anticipate any inability to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement, from time to time, we may not have sufficient cash or other liquid assets to do so. For example, timing differences between the actual receipt of income and actual payment of deductible expenses, on the one hand, and the inclusion of that income and deduction of those expenses in arriving at our taxable income, on the other hand, or non-deductible expenses such as principal amortization or repayments or capital expenditures in excess of non-cash deductions may prevent us from having sufficient cash or liquid assets to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement.
In the event that timing differences occur or we decide to retain cash or to distribute such greater amount as may be necessary to avoid income and excise taxation, we may seek to borrow funds, issue additional equity securities, pay taxable stock dividends, distribute other property or securities or engage in a transaction intended to enable us to meet the REIT distribution requirements. Any of these actions may require us to raise additional capital to meet our obligations; however, see “Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure—
Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy
.” The terms of the instruments governing our existing indebtedness restrict our ability to engage in certain of these transactions.
To preserve our qualification as a REIT, our certificate of incorporation contains ownership limits with respect to our capital stock that may delay, defer or prevent a change of control of our company.
To assist us in preserving our qualification as a REIT, our certificate of incorporation provides that if a person acquires beneficial ownership of more than 9.0% of our outstanding common stock or more than 9.9% of our outstanding preferred stock, the shares that are beneficially owned in excess of the applicable limit are considered “excess shares” and are automatically deemed transferred to a trust for the benefit of a charitable institution or other qualifying organization selected by our Board of Directors. The trust is entitled to all dividends with respect to the excess shares and the trustee may exercise all voting power over the excess shares. In addition, we have the right to purchase the excess shares for a price equal to the lesser
30
of (i) the price per share in the transaction that created the excess shares or (ii) the market price on the day we purchase the shares, but if we do not purchase the excess shares, the trustee of the trust is required to transfer the shares at the direction of our Board of Directors. These ownership limits could delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or might otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.
Our use of TRSs is limited under the Code.
Under the Code, no more than 20% of the value of the gross assets of a REIT may be represented by securities of one or more TRSs. This limitation may affect our ability to increase the size of our TRSs’ operations and assets, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with the applicable limitation, or that such compliance will not adversely affect our business. Also, our TRSs may not, among other things, operate or manage certain health care facilities, which may cause us to forego investments we might otherwise make. Finally, we may be subject to a 100% excise tax on the income derived from certain transactions with our TRSs that are not on an arm's-length basis. We believe our arrangements with our TRSs are on arm's-length terms and intend to continue to operate in a manner that allows us to avoid incurring the 100% excise tax described above, but there can be no assurance that we will be able to avoid application of that tax.
The tax imposed on REITs engaging in “prohibited transactions” may limit our ability to engage in transactions which would be treated as sales for federal income tax purposes.
A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% penalty tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold any properties that would be characterized as held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business, unless a sale or disposition qualifies under certain statutory safe harbors, such characterization is a factual determination and no guarantee can be given that the IRS would agree with our characterization of our properties or that we will always be able to make use of the available safe harbors.
Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on our stockholders or us.
The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to the tax laws, with or without retroactive application, could adversely affect our investors or us. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect our investors or us. New legislation, U.S. Treasury Department regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT
,
the federal income tax consequences of such qualification, or the federal income tax consequences of an investment in us. Also, the law relating to the tax treatment of other entities, or an investment in other entities, could change, making an investment in such other entities more attractive relative to an investment in a REIT.
The recently enacted Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “2017 Tax Act”) has significantly changed the U.S. federal income taxation of U.S. businesses and their owners, including REITs and their stockholders. Changes made by the 2017 Tax Act that could affect us and our stockholders include:
•
temporarily reducing individual U.S. federal income tax rates on ordinary income; the highest individual U.S. federal income tax rate has been reduced from 39.6% to 37% for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026;
•
permanently eliminating the progressive corporate tax rate structure, which previously imposed a maximum corporate tax rate of 35%, and replacing it with a flat corporate tax rate of 21%;
•
permitting a deduction for certain pass-through business income, including dividends received by our stockholders from us that are not designated by us as capital gain dividends or qualified dividend income, which will allow individuals, trusts, and estates to deduct up to 20% of such amounts for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026;
•
reducing the highest rate of withholding with respect to our distributions to non-U.S. stockholders that are treated as attributable to gains from the sale or exchange of U.S. real property interests from 35% to 21%;
•
limiting our deduction for net operating losses arising in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 to 80% of REIT taxable income (prior to the application of the dividends paid deduction);
•
generally limiting the deduction for net business interest expense in excess of 30% of a business’s “adjusted taxable income,” except for taxpayers (including most equity REITs) that engage in certain real estate businesses
31
and elect out of this rule (provided that such electing taxpayers must use an alternative depreciation system with longer depreciation periods); and
•
eliminating the corporate alternative minimum tax.
Many of these changes are effective immediately, without any transition periods or grandfathering for existing transactions. The 2017 Tax Act is unclear in many respects and could be subject to potential amendments and technical corrections, as well as interpretations and implementing regulations by the U.S. Treasury Department and IRS, any of which could lessen or increase the impact of the 2017 Tax Act. In addition, it is unclear how these U.S. federal income tax changes will affect state and local taxation, which often uses federal taxable income as a starting point for computing state and local tax liabilities. While some of the changes made by the 2017 Tax Act may adversely affect us in one or more reporting periods and prospectively, other changes may be beneficial on a going forward basis. We continue to work with our tax advisors and auditors to determine the full impact that the 2017 Tax Act as a whole will have on us.
ITEM 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
32
ITEM 2.
Properties
Seniors Housing and Healthcare Properties
As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned more than
1,200
properties (including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), life science and innovation centers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”) and long-term acute care facilities (“LTACs”), health systems and skilled nursing facilities (“SNFs”), and we had
14
properties under development, including
four
properties that are owned by unconsolidated real estate entities.
We believe that maintaining a balanced portfolio of high-quality assets diversified by investment type, geographic location, asset type, tenant/operator, revenue source and operating model makes us less susceptible to single-state regulatory or reimbursement changes, regional climate events and local economic downturns and diminishes the risk that any single factor or event could materially harm our business.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$1.3 billion
aggregate principal amount of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding, secured by
88
of our properties. Excluding those portions attributed to our joint venture partners, our share of mortgage loan indebtedness outstanding was
$1.2 billion
.
The following table provides additional information regarding the geographic diversification of our portfolio of properties as of
December 31, 2017
(including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities, but excluding properties classified as held for sale):
33
Seniors Housing
Communities
SNFs
MOBs
Life Science and Innovation Centers
IRFs and LTACs
Health Systems
Geographic Location
# of
Properties
Units
# of Properties
Licensed
Beds
# of Properties
Square Feet
(1)
# of Properties
Square Feet
(1)
# of Properties
Licensed Beds
# of Properties
Licensed Beds
Alabama
6
122
—
—
4
469
—
—
—
—
—
—
Arizona
28
2,394
—
—
13
830
—
—
1
60
—
—
Arkansas
4
287
—
—
1
5
—
—
—
—
—
—
California
92
9,633
—
—
26
2,058
—
—
6
503
—
—
Colorado
19
1,689
1
82
13
769
—
—
1
68
—
—
Connecticut
14
1,631
—
—
—
—
2
1,032
—
—
—
—
District of Columbia
—
—
—
—
2
102
—
—
—
—
—
—
Florida
50
4,582
—
—
19
404
1
259
6
511
—
—
Georgia
20
1,751
—
—
14
1,201
—
—
—
—
—
—
Idaho
1
70
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Illinois
25
2,953
1
82
36
1,448
1
129
4
430
—
—
Indiana
9
680
—
—
23
1,603
—
—
1
59
—
—
Kansas
9
541
—
—
1
33
—
—
—
—
—
—
Kentucky
10
911
2
280
4
173
—
—
1
384
—
—
Louisiana
1
58
—
—
5
361
—
—
—
—
—
—
Maine
6
445
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Maryland
5
360
—
—
2
83
5
489
—
—
—
—
Massachusetts
19
2,100
6
745
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Michigan
23
1,457
—
—
14
599
—
—
—
—
—
—
Minnesota
14
855
—
—
4
241
—
—
—
—
—
—
Mississippi
—
—
—
—
1
51
—
—
—
—
—
—
Missouri
2
153
—
—
20
1,096
4
636
1
60
—
—
Montana
3
182
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Nebraska
1
134
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Nevada
5
589
—
—
5
416
—
—
1
52
—
—
New Hampshire
1
125
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
New Jersey
12
1,136
1
153
3
37
—
—
—
—
—
—
New Mexico
4
450
—
—
—
—
—
—
2
123
4
544
New York
41
4,538
—
—
4
244
—
—
—
—
—
—
North Carolina
23
1,894
—
—
18
759
8
1,371
1
124
—
—
North Dakota
2
115
—
—
1
114
—
—
—
—
—
—
Ohio
20
1,225
6
907
28
1,225
—
—
1
50
—
—
Oklahoma
8
463
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
4
954
Oregon
29
2,584
—
—
1
105
—
—
—
—
—
—
Pennsylvania
32
2,362
4
620
9
713
3
566
1
52
—
—
Rhode Island
6
596
—
—
—
—
2
250
—
—
—
—
South Carolina
5
402
—
—
20
1,104
—
—
—
—
—
—
South Dakota
4
182
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Tennessee
18
1,420
—
—
10
395
—
—
1
49
—
—
Texas
49
3,786
—
—
18
814
—
—
9
590
1
445
Utah
3
321
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Virginia
8
655
—
—
5
231
3
425
—
—
—
—
Washington
28
2,357
5
469
10
579
—
—
—
—
—
—
West Virginia
2
124
4
326
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wisconsin
48
2,219
—
—
21
1,105
—
—
—
—
—
—
Wyoming
2
168
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Total U.S.
711
60,699
30
3,664
355
19,367
29
5,157
37
3,115
9
1,943
Canada
41
4,499
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
United Kingdom
12
779
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3
121
Total
764
65,977
30
3,664
355
19,367
29
5,157
37
3,115
12
2,064
(1)
Square Feet are in thousands
34
Corporate Offices
Our headquarters are located in Chicago, Illinois and we have an additional corporate office in Louisville, Kentucky. We lease all of our corporate offices.
ITEM 3.
Legal Proceedings
The information contained in “
NOTE 14—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference into this Item 3. Except as set forth therein, we are not a party to, nor is any of our property the subject of, any material pending legal proceedings.
ITEM 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.
35
PART II
ITEM 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information
Our common stock, par value $0.25 per share, is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) under the symbol “VTR.” The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported on the NYSE and the dividends declared per share.
Sales Price of
Common Stock
Cash Dividends
Declared
High
Low
2016
First Quarter
$
63.22
$
48.43
$
0.73
Second Quarter
72.82
59.69
0.73
Third Quarter
76.56
67.33
0.73
Fourth Quarter
69.19
57.86
0.775
2017
First Quarter
$
65.41
$
59.36
$
0.775
Second Quarter
71.93
62.63
0.775
Third Quarter
69.98
64.80
0.775
Fourth Quarter
65.39
59.84
0.79
As of
January 31, 2018
, we had
356.2 million
shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately
4,520
stockholders of record.
Dividends and Distributions
We pay regular quarterly dividends to holders of our common stock to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) governing REITs. In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we are required under the Code, among other things, to distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to any net capital gain. In addition, we will be subject to income tax at the regular corporate rate to the extent we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, including any net capital gains. During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we paid the first three quarterly installments of our 2017 dividend of
$0.775
per share. In December 2017, we declared the fourth quarter cash dividend on our common stock of
$0.79
per share, which was paid in January 2018.
On
February 9, 2018
, our Board of Directors declared the first quarterly installment of our
2018
dividend on our common stock in the amount of $0.79 per share, payable in cash on
April 12, 2018
to stockholders of record on
April 2, 2018
. We expect to distribute at least 100% of our taxable net income, after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards, to our stockholders for
2018
.
In general, our Board of Directors makes decisions regarding the nature, frequency and amount of our dividends on a quarterly basis. Because the Board considers many factors when making these decisions, including our present and future liquidity needs, our current and projected financial condition and results of operations and the performance and credit quality of our tenants, operators, borrowers and managers, we cannot assure you that we will maintain the practice of paying regular quarterly dividends to continue to qualify as a REIT. Please see “Cautionary Statements” and the risk factors included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a description of other factors that may affect our distribution policy.
Director and Employee Stock Sales
Certain of our directors, executive officers and other employees have adopted and, from time to time in the future, may adopt non-discretionary, written trading plans that comply with Rule 10b5-1 under the Exchange Act, or otherwise monetize, gift or transfer their equity-based compensation. These transactions typically are conducted for estate, tax and financial planning purposes and are subject to compliance with our Amended and Restated Securities Trading Policy and Procedures (“Securities Trading Policy”), the minimum stock ownership requirements contained in our Guidelines on Governance and all applicable laws and regulations.
36
Our Securities Trading Policy expressly prohibits our directors, executive officers and employees from buying or selling derivatives with respect to our securities or other financial instruments that are designed to hedge or offset a decrease in the market value of our securities and from engaging in short sales with respect to our securities. In addition, our Securities Trading Policy prohibits our directors and executive officers from holding our securities in margin accounts or pledging our securities to secure loans without the prior approval of our Audit and Compliance Committee. Each of our executive officers has advised us that he or she is in compliance with the Securities Trading Policy and has not pledged any of our equity securities to secure margin or other loans.
Stock Repurchases
The table below summarizes repurchases of our common stock made during the quarter ended
December 31, 2017
:
Number of Shares
Repurchased
(1)
Average Price
Per Share
October 1 through October 31
8,378
$
62.51
November 1 through November 30
—
$
—
December 1 through December 31
—
$
—
(1)
Repurchases represent shares withheld to pay taxes on the vesting of restricted stock granted to employees under our 2006 Incentive Plan or 2012 Incentive Plan or restricted stock units granted to employees under the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. (“NHP”) 2005 Performance Incentive Plan and assumed by us in connection with our acquisition of NHP. The value of the shares withheld is the closing price of our common stock on the date the vesting or exercise occurred (or, if not a trading day, the immediately preceding trading day) or the fair market value of our common stock at the time of the exercise, as the case may be.
37
Stock Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the cumulative total return (including dividends) to the holders of our common stock from
December 31, 2012
through
December 31, 2017
, with the cumulative total returns of the NYSE Composite Index, the FTSE NAREIT Composite REIT Index (the “Composite REIT Index”) and the S&P 500 Index over the same period. The comparison assumes $100 was invested on
December 31, 2012
in our common stock and in each of the foregoing indexes and assumes reinvestment of dividends, as applicable. We have included the NYSE Composite Index in the performance graph because our common stock is listed on the NYSE, and we have included the S&P 500 Index because we are a member of the S&P 500. We have included the Composite REIT Index because we believe that it is most representative of the industries in which we compete, or otherwise provides a fair basis for comparison with us, and is therefore particularly relevant to an assessment of our performance. The figures in the table below are rounded to the nearest dollar.
12/31/2012
12/31/2013
12/31/2014
12/31/2015
12/31/2016
12/31/2017
Ventas
$100
$92.36
$120.92
$114.20
$132.64
$133.54
NYSE Composite Index
$100
$126.40
$135.09
$129.72
$145.38
$172.83
Composite REIT Index
$100
$102.34
$130.21
$132.88
$145.33
$158.84
S&P 500 Index
$100
$132.37
$150.48
$152.55
$170.78
$208.05
38
ITEM 6.
Selected Financial Data
You should read the following selected financial data in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as acquisitions, dispositions, changes in accounting policies and other items may impact the comparability of the financial data.
As of and For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Operating Data
Rental income
$
1,593,598
$
1,476,176
$
1,346,046
$
1,138,457
$
1,036,356
Resident fees and services
1,843,232
1,847,306
1,811,255
1,552,951
1,406,005
Interest expense
448,196
419,740
367,114
292,065
249,009
Property-level operating expenses
1,483,072
1,434,762
1,383,640
1,195,388
1,109,925
General, administrative and professional fees
135,490
126,875
128,035
121,738
115,083
Income from continuing operations
643,949
554,209
389,539
359,296
375,498
Net income attributable to common stockholders
1,356,470
649,231
417,843
475,767
453,509
Per Share Data
Income from continuing operations:
Basic
$
1.81
$
1.61
$
1.18
$
1.22
$
1.28
Diluted
$
1.80
$
1.59
$
1.17
$
1.21
$
1.27
Net income attributable to common stockholders:
Basic
$
3.82
$
1.88
$
1.26
$
1.62
$
1.55
Diluted
$
3.78
$
1.86
$
1.25
$
1.60
$
1.54
Dividends declared per common share
$
3.115
$
2.965
$
3.04
$
2.965
$
2.735
Other Data
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
1,442,180
$
1,372,341
$
1,398,831
$
1,261,281
$
1,201,706
Net cash used in investing activities
(976,517
)
(1,234,643
)
(2,423,692
)
(2,055,040
)
(1,282,760
)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
(671,327
)
96,838
1,023,058
751,621
108,045
FFO
(1)
1,512,885
1,440,544
1,365,408
1,273,680
1,208,458
Normalized FFO
(1)
1,491,241
1,438,643
1,493,683
1,330,018
1,220,709
Balance Sheet Data
Real estate investments, at cost
$
26,205,833
$
25,327,215
$
23,802,454
$
20,196,770
$
21,403,592
Cash and cash equivalents
81,355
286,707
53,023
55,348
94,816
Total assets
23,954,541
23,166,600
22,261,918
21,165,913
19,731,494
Senior notes payable and other debt
11,276,062
11,127,326
11,206,996
10,844,351
9,364,992
(1)
We consider Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and normalized FFO to be useful supplemental measures of operating performance of an equity REIT. In particular, we believe that normalized FFO is useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to compare our operating performance to the operating performance of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis without having to account for differences caused by non-recurring items and other non-operational events such as transactions and litigation. In some cases, we provide information about identified non-cash components of FFO and normalized FFO because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess the impact of those items on our financial results.
FFO and normalized FFO presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or otherwise disclosed by us, may not be comparable to FFO and normalized FFO presented by other real estate companies due to the fact that not all real estate companies use the same definitions. FFO and normalized FFO should not be considered as alternatives to net income or income from continuing operations (both determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
39
(“GAAP”)) as indicators of our financial performance or as alternatives to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as measures of our liquidity, nor are FFO and normalized FFO necessarily indicative of sufficient cash flow to fund all of our needs.
We use the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) definition of FFO. NAREIT defines FFO as net income attributable to common stockholders (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains or losses from sales of real estate property, including gains or losses on re-measurement of equity method investments, and impairment write-downs of depreciable real estate, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures will be calculated to reflect FFO on the same basis. We define normalized FFO as FFO excluding the following income and expense items (which may be recurring in nature): (a) merger-related costs and expenses, including amortization of intangibles, transition and integration expenses, and deal costs and expenses, including expenses and recoveries relating to acquisition lawsuits; (b) the impact of any expenses related to asset impairment and valuation allowances, the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees, or additional costs, expenses, discounts, make-whole payments, penalties or premiums incurred as a result of early retirement or payment of our debt; (c) the non-cash effect of income tax benefits or expenses, the non-cash impact of changes to our executive equity compensation plan and derivative transactions that have non-cash mark-to-market impacts on our Consolidated Statements of Income; (d) the financial impact of contingent consideration, severance-related costs and charitable donations made to the Ventas Charitable Foundation; (e) gains and losses for non-operational foreign currency hedge agreements and changes in the fair value of financial instruments; (f) gains and losses on non-real estate dispositions and other unusual items related to unconsolidated entities; (g) expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements and related matters; and (h) net expenses or recoveries related to natural disasters.
See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Funds From Operations and Normalized Funds from Operations” included in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a reconciliation of FFO and normalized FFO to our GAAP earnings.
ITEM 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion provides information that management believes is relevant to an understanding and assessment of the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Ventas, Inc. You should read this discussion in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as it will help you understand:
•
Our company and the environment in which we operate;
•
Our
2017
highlights and other recent developments;
•
Our critical accounting policies and estimates;
•
Our results of operations for the last three years;
•
How we manage our assets and liabilities;
•
Our liquidity and capital resources;
•
Our cash flows; and
•
Our future contractual obligations.
Corporate and Operating Environment
We are a real estate investment trust (“REIT”)
with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned more than
1,200
properties (including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), life science and innovation centers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”) and long-term acute care facilities (“LTACs”), health systems and skilled nursing facilities (“SNFs”), and we had
14
properties under development, including
four
properties that are owned by unconsolidated real estate entities.
We are an S&P 500 company headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
40
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased a total of
546
properties (excluding MOBs) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures.
As of
December 31, 2017
, pursuant to long-term management agreements, we engaged independent operators, such as Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) and Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”), to manage
297
seniors housing communities for us.
Our
three
largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”), Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) leased from us
135
properties (excluding
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement),
10
properties and
31
properties (excluding
one
MOB included within our office operations reportable business segment), respectively, as of
December 31, 2017
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. (“Lillibridge”) subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC (“PMBRES”), we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
We conduct our operations through three reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. See “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As of
December 31, 2017
, our consolidated portfolio included 100% ownership interests in
1,135
properties and controlling joint venture interests in
69
properties, and we had non-controlling ownership interests in
31
properties through investments in unconsolidated entities. Through Lillibridge and PMBRES, we provided management and leasing services to third parties with respect to
105
MOBs as of
December 31, 2017
.
We aim to enhance shareholder value by delivering consistent, superior total returns through a strategy of: (1) generating reliable and growing cash flows; (2) maintaining a balanced, diversified portfolio of high-quality assets; and (3) preserving our financial strength, flexibility and liquidity.
Our ability to access capital in a timely and cost-effective manner is critical to the success of our business strategy because it affects our ability to satisfy existing obligations, including the repayment of maturing indebtedness, and to make future investments. Factors such as general market conditions, interest rates, credit ratings on our securities, expectations of our potential future earnings and cash distributions, and the trading price of our common stock that are beyond our control and fluctuate over time all impact our access to and cost of external capital. For that reason, we generally attempt to match the long-term duration of our investments in real property with long-term financing through the issuance of shares of our common stock or the incurrence of long-term fixed rate debt.
2017
Highlights and Other Recent Developments
Investments and Dispositions
•
In March 2017, we provided secured debt financing to a subsidiary of Ardent to facilitate Ardent’s acquisition of LHP Hospital Group, Inc., which included a
$700.0 million
term loan and a
$60.0 million
revolving line of credit feature (of which
$28.0 million
was outstanding at
December 31, 2017
). The LIBOR-based debt financing has a
five
-year term, a
one
-year lock out feature and a weighted average interest rate of approximately
9.3%
as of
December 31, 2017
and is guaranteed by Ardent’s parent company.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we acquired
15
triple-net leased properties (including
six
assets previously owned by an equity method investee),
four
properties reported within our office operations reportable business segment (
three
life science, research and medical assets and
one
medical office building) and
three
seniors housing communities (reported within our senior living operations reportable business segment) for an aggregate purchase price of
$691.3 million
.
41
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we sold
53
triple-net leased properties,
five
MOBs and certain vacant land parcels for aggregate consideration of
$870.8 million
, and we recognized a gain on the sale of these assets of
$717.3 million
, net of taxes.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$37.6 million
for the partial prepayment and
$35.5 million
for the full repayment of loans receivable, which resulted in total gains of
$0.6 million
.
Liquidity, Capital and Dividends
•
In March 2017, we issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.100%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.280%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.850%
senior notes due 2027 at a public offering price equal to
99.196%
of par, for total proceeds of
$396.8 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
•
In April 2017, we entered into an unsecured credit facility comprised of a
$3.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility, priced at LIBOR plus
0.875%
, that replaced our previous
$2.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility priced at LIBOR plus
1.0%
.
•
In April 2017, we repaid in full, at par,
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 upon maturity.
•
In June 2017, we issued and sold
C$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.55%
senior notes, Series D due 2023 at a price equal to
99.954%
of par, for total proceeds of
C$274.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses. We used part of the proceeds to repay
C$124.4 million
on our unsecured term loan due 2019.
•
In August 2017, we used most of the proceeds from the sale of
22
SNFs to repay the balances then outstanding on the 2018 and 2019 term loans.
•
In September 2017, we entered into a new
$400.0 million
secured revolving construction credit facility which matures in 2022 and will be primarily used to finance life science and innovation center and other construction projects.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we issued and sold
1.1 million
shares of common stock under our “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program. Aggregate net proceeds for these activities were
$73.9 million
, after sales agent commissions.
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we paid the first three quarterly installments of our 2017 dividend of
$0.775
per share. In December 2017, we declared the fourth quarter cash dividend on our common stock of
$0.79
per share, which grew by
2%
over third quarter
2017
and was paid in January 2018.
Portfolio
•
The sale of the triple-net leased properties above included
36
SNFs, owned by us and operated by Kindred. These assets were sold for aggregate consideration of approximately
$700 million
and we recognized a gain on the sale of
$657.6 million
, net of taxes.
Other Recent Developments
•
In January 2018, we transitioned the management of 76 private pay seniors housing communities to Eclipse Senior Living (“ESL”). These assets, substantially all of which were previously leased by Elmcroft Senior Living (“Elmcroft”), are now operated by ESL under a management contract with us. We acquired a 34% ownership stake in ESL with customary rights and protections. ESL management owns the remaining 66% stake. We also intend to form a new joint venture with an institutional partner related to the assets previously leased by Elmcroft. However, there can be no assurance whether, when or on what terms the joint venture will be completed.
42
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) set forth in the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”), as published by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions regarding future events that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. We base these estimates on our experience and assumptions we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. However, if our judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions or other matters had been different, we may have applied a different accounting treatment, resulting in a different presentation of our financial statements. We periodically reevaluate our estimates and assumptions, and in the event they prove to be different from actual results, we make adjustments in subsequent periods to reflect more current estimates and assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. We believe that the critical accounting policies described below, among others, affect our more significant estimates and judgments used in the preparation of our financial statements. For more information regarding our critical accounting policies, see “
NOTE 2—ACCOUNTING POLICIES
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Principles of Consolidation
The Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K
include our accounts and the accounts of our wholly owned subsidiaries and the joint venture entities over which we exercise control. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation, and our net earnings are reduced by the portion of net earnings attributable to noncontrolling interests.
GAAP
requires us to identify entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights and to determine which business enterprise is the primary beneficiary of variable interest entities (“VIEs”). A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; and (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. We consolidate our investment in a VIE when we determine that we are its primary beneficiary. We may change our original assessment of a VIE upon subsequent events such as the modification of contractual arrangements that affects the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposition of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.
We identify the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. We perform this analysis on an ongoing basis.
As it relates to investments in joint ventures, GAAP may preclude consolidation by the sole general partner in certain circumstances based on the type of rights held by the limited partner(s). We assess limited partners’ rights and their impact on our consolidation conclusions, and we reassess if there is a change to the terms or in the exercisability of the rights of the limited partners, the sole general partner increases or decreases its ownership of limited partnership interests, or there is an increase or decrease in the number of outstanding limited partnership interests. We also apply this guidance to managing member interests in limited liability companies.
We consolidate several VIEs that share the following common characteristics:
•
the VIE is in the legal form of an LP or LLC;
•
the VIE was designed to own and manage its underlying real estate investments;
•
we are the general partner or managing member of the VIE;
•
we own a majority of the voting interests in the VIE;
•
a minority of voting interests in the VIE are owned by external third parties, unrelated to us;
•
the minority owners do not have substantive kick-out or participating rights in the VIE; and
•
we are the primary beneficiary of the VIE.
We have separately identified certain special purpose entities that were established to allow investments in life science projects by tax credit investors (“TCIs”). We have determined that these special purpose entities are VIEs and that we are the
43
primary beneficiary of the VIEs, and therefore we consolidate these special purpose entities. Our primary beneficiary determination is based upon several factors, including but not limited to the rights we have in directing the activities which most significantly impact the VIEs’ economic performance as well as certain guarantees which protect the TCIs from losses should a tax credit recapture event occur.
Accounting for Real Estate Acquisitions
On January 1, 2017, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2017-01,
Clarifying the Definition of a Business
(“ASU 2017-01”) which narrows the
FASB’s
definition of a business and provides a framework that gives entities a basis for making reasonable judgments about whether a transaction involves an asset or a business. ASU 2017-01 states that when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets, the acquired asset is not a business. If this initial test is not met, an acquired asset cannot be considered a business unless it includes an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create output. The primary differences between business combinations and asset acquisitions include recognition of goodwill at the acquisition date and expense recognition for transaction costs as incurred. We are applying ASU 2017-01 prospectively for acquisitions after January 1, 2017.
Regardless of whether an acquisition is considered a business combination or an asset acquisition, we record the cost of the businesses or assets acquired as tangible and intangible assets and liabilities based upon their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. Intangibles primarily include the value of in-place leases and acquired lease contracts.
We estimate the fair value of buildings acquired on an as-if-vacant basis or replacement cost basis and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, generally not to exceed
35 years
. We determine the fair value of other fixed assets, such as site improvements and furniture, fixtures and equipment, based upon the replacement cost and depreciate such value over the assets’ estimated remaining useful lives as determined at the applicable acquisition date. We determine the value of land either by considering the sales prices of similar properties in recent transactions or based on internal analyses of recently acquired and existing comparable properties within our portfolio. We generally determine the value of construction in progress based upon the replacement cost. However, for certain acquired properties that are part of a ground-up development, we determine fair value by using the same valuation approach as for all other properties and deducting the estimated cost to complete the development. During the remaining construction period, we capitalize project costs until the development has reached substantial completion. Construction in progress, including capitalized interest, is not depreciated until the development has reached substantial completion.
The fair value of acquired lease-related intangibles, if any, reflects: (i) the estimated value of any above and/or below market leases, determined by discounting the difference between the estimated market rent and in-place lease rent; and (ii) the estimated value of in-place leases related to the cost to obtain tenants, including leasing commissions, and an estimated value of the absorption period to reflect the value of the rent and recovery costs foregone during a reasonable lease-up period as if the acquired space was vacant. We amortize any acquired lease-related intangibles to revenue or amortization expense over the remaining life of the associated lease plus any assumed bargain renewal periods. If a lease is terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed upon expiration, we recognize all unamortized amounts of lease-related intangibles associated with that lease in operations at that time.
We estimate the fair value of purchase option intangible assets and liabilities, if any, by discounting the difference between the applicable property’s acquisition date fair value and an estimate of its future option price. We do not amortize the resulting intangible asset or liability over the term of the lease, but rather adjust the recognized value of the asset or liability upon sale.
We estimate the fair value of tenant or other customer relationships acquired, if any, by considering the nature and extent of existing relationships with the tenant or customer, growth prospects for developing new business with the tenant or customer, the tenant’s credit quality, expectations of lease renewals with the tenant, and the potential for significant, additional future leasing arrangements with the tenant, and we amortize that value over the expected life of the associated arrangements or leases, including the remaining terms of the related leases and any expected renewal periods. We estimate the fair value of trade names and trademarks using a royalty rate methodology and amortize that value over the estimated useful life of the trade name or trademark.
In connection with an acquisition, we may assume rights and obligations under certain lease agreements pursuant to which we become the lessee of a given property. We generally assume the lease classification previously determined by the prior lessee absent a modification in the assumed lease agreement. We assess assumed operating leases, including ground leases, to determine whether the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us given current market conditions on the
44
acquisition date. To the extent the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us relative to market conditions on the acquisition date, we recognize an intangible asset or liability at fair value and amortize that asset or liability to interest or rental expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income over the applicable lease term. We include all lease-related intangible assets and liabilities within acquired lease intangibles and accounts payable and other liabilities, respectively, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We determine the fair value of loans receivable acquired by discounting the estimated future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans with the same terms and length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings. We do not establish a valuation allowance at the acquisition date because the estimated future cash flows already reflect our judgment regarding their uncertainty. We recognize the difference between the acquisition date fair value and the total expected cash flows as interest income using an effective interest method over the life of the applicable loan. Subsequent to the acquisition date, we evaluate changes regarding the uncertainty of future cash flows and the need for a valuation allowance, as appropriate.
We estimate the fair value of noncontrolling interests assumed consistent with the manner in which we value all of the underlying assets and liabilities.
We calculate the fair value of long-term assumed debt by discounting the remaining contractual cash flows on each instrument at the current market rate for those borrowings, which we approximate based on the rate at which we would expect to incur a replacement instrument on the date of acquisition, and recognize any fair value adjustments related to long-term debt as effective yield adjustments over the remaining term of the instrument.
Impairment of Long-Lived and Intangible Assets
We periodically evaluate our long-lived assets, primarily consisting of investments in real estate, for impairment indicators. If indicators of impairment are present, we evaluate the carrying value of the related real estate investments in relation to the future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying operations. In performing this evaluation, we consider market conditions and our current intentions with respect to holding or disposing of the asset. We adjust the net book value of leased properties and other long-lived assets to fair value if the sum of the expected future undiscounted cash flows, including sales proceeds, is less than book value. We recognize an impairment loss at the time we make any such determination.
If impairment indicators arise with respect to intangible assets with finite useful lives, we evaluate impairment by comparing the carrying amount of the asset to the estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If estimated future undiscounted net cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, then we estimate the fair value of the asset and compare the estimated fair value to the intangible asset’s carrying value. We recognize any shortfall from carrying value as an impairment loss in the current period.
We evaluate our investments in unconsolidated entities for impairment at least annually, and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our investment may exceed its fair value. If we determine that a decline in the fair value of our investment in an unconsolidated entity is other-than-temporary, and if such reduced fair value is below the carrying value, we record an impairment.
We test goodwill for impairment at least annually, and more frequently if indicators arise. We first assess qualitative factors, such as current macroeconomic conditions, state of the equity and capital markets and our overall financial and operating performance, to determine the likelihood that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If we determine it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we proceed with the two-step approach to evaluating impairment. First, we estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and compare it to the reporting unit’s carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds fair value, we proceed with the second step, which requires us to assign the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit as if it had been acquired in a business combination at the date of the impairment test. The excess fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to the assets and liabilities is the implied value of goodwill and is used to determine the amount of impairment. We recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying value of goodwill exceeds the implied value in the current period.
Estimates of fair value used in our evaluation of goodwill (if necessary based on our qualitative assessment), investments in real estate, investments in unconsolidated entities and intangible assets are based upon discounted future cash flow projections or other acceptable valuation techniques that are based, in turn, upon all available evidence including level three inputs, such as revenue and expense growth rates, estimates of future cash flows, capitalization rates, discount rates, general economic conditions and trends, or other available market data. Our ability to accurately predict future operating results
45
and cash flows and to estimate and determine fair values impacts the timing and recognition of impairments. While we believe our assumptions are reasonable, changes in these assumptions may have a material impact on our financial results.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments
Fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement, and we determine fair value based on the assumptions that we expect market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within levels one and two of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within level three of the hierarchy).
Level one inputs utilize unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. Level two inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in level one that are directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability. Level two inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets and other inputs for the asset or liability that are observable at commonly quoted intervals, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates and yield curves. Level three inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which typically are based on our own assumptions, because there is little, if any, related market activity. If the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the hierarchy, the level within which the entire fair value measurement falls is the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. If the volume and level of market activity for an asset or liability has decreased significantly relative to the normal market activity for such asset or liability (or similar assets or liabilities), then transactions or quoted prices may not accurately reflect fair value. In addition, if there is evidence that a transaction for an asset or liability is not orderly, little, if any, weight is placed on that transaction price as an indicator of fair value. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.
Revenue Recognition
Triple-Net Leased Properties and Office Operations
Certain of our triple-net leases and most of our MOB and life science and innovation center (collectively, “office operations”) leases provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent. We recognize base rental revenues under these leases on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term when collectability is reasonably assured. Recognizing rental income on a straight-line basis generally results in recognized revenues during the first half of a lease term exceeding the cash amounts contractually due from our tenants, creating a straight-line rent receivable that is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Certain of our leases provide for periodic increases in base rent only if certain revenue parameters or other substantive contingencies are met. We recognize the increased rental revenue under these leases as the related parameters or contingencies are met, rather than on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term.
Senior Living Operations
We recognize resident fees and services, other than move-in fees, monthly as services are provided. We recognize move-in fees on a straight-line basis over the average resident stay. Our lease agreements with residents generally have terms of
12
to
18
months and are cancelable by the resident upon
30
days’ notice.
Other
We recognize interest income from loans and investments, including discounts and premiums, using the effective interest method when collectibility is reasonably assured. We apply the effective interest method on a loan-by-loan basis and recognize discounts and premiums as yield adjustments over the related loan term. We recognize interest income on an impaired loan to the extent our estimate of the fair value of the collateral is sufficient to support the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest. When the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest is equal to or less than our estimate of the fair value of the collateral, we recognize interest income on a cash basis. We provide a reserve against an impaired loan to the extent our total investment in the loan exceeds our estimate of the fair value of the loan collateral.
46
We recognize income from rent, lease termination fees, development services, management advisory services and all other income when all of the following criteria are met in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Staff Accounting Bulletin 104: (i) the applicable agreement has been fully executed and delivered; (ii) services have been rendered; (iii) the amount is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectibility is reasonably assured.
Allowances
We assess the collectibility of our rent receivables, including straight-line rent receivables. We base our assessment of the collectibility of rent receivables (other than straight-line rent receivables) on several factors, including, among other things, payment history, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to recover the full value of the receivable, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be recovered. We base our assessment of the collectibility of straight-line rent receivables on several factors, including, among other things, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the historical operations and operating trends of the property, the historical payment pattern of the tenant and the type of property. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to receive the rent payments due in the future, we provide a reserve against the recognized straight-line rent receivable asset for the portion, up to its full value, that we estimate may not be recovered. If we change our assumptions or estimates regarding the collectibility of future rent payments required by a lease, we may adjust our reserve to increase or reduce the rental revenue recognized in the period we make such change in our assumptions or estimates.
Federal Income Tax
We have elected to be treated as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. Accordingly, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on net income that we distribute to our stockholders, provided that we continue to qualify as a REIT. However, with respect to certain of our subsidiaries that have elected to be treated as taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS” or “TRS entities”), we record income tax expense or benefit, as those entities are subject to federal income tax similar to regular corporations. Certain foreign subsidiaries are subject to foreign income tax, although they did not elect to be treated as TRSs.
We account for deferred income taxes using the asset and liability method and recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in our financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Any increase or decrease in the deferred tax liability that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about expected future tax consequences of events, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur. Deferred income taxes also reflect the impact of operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. A valuation allowance is provided if we believe it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. Any increase or decrease in the valuation allowance that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about the realizability of the related deferred tax asset, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur.
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We recognize interest and penalties, if applicable, related to uncertain tax positions as part of income tax benefit or expense.
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Standards
On January 1, 2017, we adopted ASU 2016-09,
Compensation - Stock Compensation
(“ASU 2016-09”) which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions, including the accounting for forfeitures and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. Adoption of ASU 2016-09 did not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements
In 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09,
Revenue From Contracts With Customers
(“ASU 2014-09”, as codified in “ASC 606”), which outlines a comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers. ASC 606 states that “an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.” While ASC 606 specifically references contracts with customers, it also applied to other transactions such as the sale of real
47
estate. ASC 606 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and we plan to adopt ASC 606 using the modified retrospective method.
We have evaluated all of our revenue streams to identify whether each revenue stream would be subject to the provisions of ASC 606 and any differences in the timing, measurement or presentation of revenue recognition. Based on a review of our various revenue streams, we believe the following items in our Consolidated Statements of Income are subject to ASC 606: office building and other services revenue, certain elements of our resident fees and services and gains on the sale of real estate. Our office building and other services revenues are primarily generated by management contracts where we provide management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services. Resident fees and services primarily include amounts related to resident leases (subject to ASC 840,
Leases
) but also includes revenues generated through point-of-sale transactions that are ancillary to the residents’ contractual rights to occupy living and common-area space at the communities. While these revenue streams are subject to the provisions of ASC 606, we believe that the pattern and timing of recognition of income will be consistent with the current accounting model.
As it relates to gains on sale of real estate, we will apply the provisions of ASC 610-20,
Gain or Loss From Derecognition of Non-financial Assets
(“ASC 610-20”)
,
an
d
we expect to recognize any gains when we transfer control of a property
and when it is probable that we will collect substantially all of the related consideration.
We will no longer apply existing sales criteria in ASC 360,
Property, Plant, and Equipment.
We will recognize on January 1, 2018, through a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings,
$31.2 million
of deferred gains relating to sales of real estate assets in 2015. Other than the cumulative effect adjustment relating to such deferred gains, the adoption of ASC 606 and ASC 610-20 will not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements. Our remaining implementation item includes finalizing revised disclosures in accordance with the new standard.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02,
Leases
(“ASU 2016-02”), which introduces a lessee model that brings most leases on the balance sheet and, among other changes, eliminates the requirement in current GAAP for an entity to use bright-line tests in determining lease classification. The FASB also issued an Exposure Draft on January 5, 2018 proposing to amend ASU 2016-02, which would provide lessors with a practical expedient, by class of underlying assets, to not separate non-lease components from the related lease components and, instead, to account for those components as a single lease component, if certain criteria are met. ASU 2016-02 and the related Exposure Draft are not effective for us until January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance and the impact to us, as both lessor and lessee, on our Consolidated Financial Statements. We expect to utilize the practical expedients proposed in the Exposure Draft as part of our adoption of ASU 2016-02.
In 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,
Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments
(“ASU 2016-15”), which provides clarification regarding how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows and ASU 2016-18,
Restricted Cash
(“ASU 2016-18”), which requires an entity to show the changes in total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 and ASU 2016-18 are effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and will be applied by us using a retrospective transition method. Adoption of these standards is not expected to have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
In 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16,
Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory
(“ASU 2016-16”), which requires a company to recognize the tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. ASU 2016-16 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and will be applied by us using a modified retrospective method. Adoption of this standard is not expected to have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Results of Operations
In August 2015, we completed the spin-off of most of our post-acute/skilled nursing facility portfolio into an independent, publicly traded REIT name Care Capital Properties, Inc. (“CCP”) (the “CCP Spin-Off”). The historical results of operations of the CCP properties are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying results of operations. Throughout this discussion, “continuing operations” does not include properties disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
In September 2016, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the university affiliated life science and innovation real estate assets of Wexford Science & Technology, LLC (“Wexford”) from affiliates of Blackstone Real Estate Partners VIII, L.P. (the “Life Sciences Acquisition”). As a result, we renamed our MOB operations reportable business segment “office operations,” which now includes both MOBs and life science and innovation centers.
48
As of
December 31, 2017
, we operated through
three
reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. Under our triple-net leased properties segment, we invest in and own seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our office operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease and manage MOBs and life science and innovation centers throughout the United States. Information provided for “all other” includes income from loans and investments and other miscellaneous income and various corporate-level expenses not directly attributable to any of our
three
reportable business segments. Assets included in “all other” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable.
Our chief operating decision makers evaluate performance of the combined properties in each reportable business segment and determine how to allocate resources to those segments, in significant part, based on segment NOI and related measures.
For further information regarding our business segments and a discussion of our definition of segment NOI, see “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Years Ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
The table below shows our results of operations for the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
and the effect of changes in those results from period to period on our net income attributable to common stockholders.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
(Decrease) Increase to Net Income
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI:
Triple-net leased properties
$
844,711
$
850,755
$
(6,044
)
(0.7
)%
Senior living operations
593,167
604,328
(11,161
)
(1.8
)
Office operations
524,566
444,276
80,290
18.1
All other
119,208
101,214
17,994
17.8
Total segment NOI
2,081,652
2,000,573
81,079
4.1
Interest and other income
6,034
876
5,158
nm
Interest expense
(448,196
)
(419,740
)
(28,456
)
(6.8
)
Depreciation and amortization
(887,948
)
(898,924
)
10,976
1.2
General, administrative and professional fees
(135,490
)
(126,875
)
(8,615
)
(6.8
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(754
)
(2,779
)
2,025
72.9
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(10,535
)
(24,635
)
14,100
57.2
Other
(20,052
)
(9,988
)
(10,064
)
nm
Income before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interests
584,711
518,508
66,203
12.8
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(561
)
4,358
(4,919
)
nm
Income tax benefit
59,799
31,343
28,456
nm
Income from continuing operations
643,949
554,209
89,740
16.2
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
812
nm
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
619,070
nm
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
709,622
nm
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
(2,383
)
nm
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1,356,470
$
649,231
707,239
nm
nm—not meaningful
49
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties
NOI for our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment equals the rental income and other services revenue earned from our triple-net assets. We incur no direct operating expenses for this segment.
The following table summarizes results of operations in our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Decrease to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
840,131
$
845,834
$
(5,703
)
(0.7
)%
Other services revenue
4,580
4,921
(341
)
(6.9
)
Segment NOI
$
844,711
$
850,755
(6,044
)
(0.7
)
Triple-net leased properties segment NOI
decreased
in
2017
over the prior year primarily due the sale of
36
Kindred SNF properties during
2017
, partially offset by rent increases due to contractual escalations pursuant to the terms of our leases and rent from
eight
seniors housing communities that we transitioned from senior living operations to triple-net leased properties during 2017.
In our triple-net leased properties segment, our revenues generally consist of fixed rental amounts (subject to annual contractual escalations) received from our tenants in accordance with the applicable lease terms. However, occupancy rates may affect the profitability of our tenants’ operations. The following table sets forth average continuing occupancy rates related to the triple-net leased properties we owned at
December 31, 2017
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2017
(which is the most recent information available to us from our tenants) and average continuing occupancy rates related to the triple-net leased properties we owned at
December 31, 2016
for the trailing 12 months ended September 30,
2016
.
Number of Properties at December 31, 2017
(1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2017
(1)
Number of Properties at December 31, 2016
(1)
Average Occupancy
for the Trailing 12 Months
Ended September 30,
2016
(1)
Seniors housing communities
418
86.6
%
431
88.2
%
SNFs
17
86.4
53
79.9
IRFs and LTACs
36
60.4
38
59.1
(1)
Excludes properties included in discontinued operations and properties classified as held for sale, non-stabilized properties, properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and certain properties for which we do not receive occupancy information. Also excludes properties acquired during the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively, and properties that transitioned operators for which we do not have eight full quarters of results subsequent to the transition.
The following table compares results of operations for our
494
same-store triple-net leased properties, unadjusted for foreign currency movements between comparison periods. With regard to our triple-net leased properties segment, “same-store” refers to properties owned, consolidated, operational and reported under a consistent business model for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
50
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
769,063
$
760,848
$
8,215
1.1
%
Segment NOI
$
769,063
$
760,848
8,215
1.1
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations
The following table summarizes results of operations in our senior living operations reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Decrease to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Resident fees and services
$
1,843,232
$
1,847,306
$
(4,074
)
(0.2
)%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(1,250,065
)
(1,242,978
)
(7,087
)
(0.6
)
Segment NOI
$
593,167
$
604,328
(11,161
)
(1.8
)
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy
for the Year Ended
December 31,
Average Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for
the Year Ended
December 31,
2017
2016
2017
2016
2017
2016
Total communities
293
298
88.3
%
90.3
%
$
5,725
$
5,474
Resident fees and services include all amounts earned from residents at our seniors housing communities, such as rental fees related to resident leases, extended health care fees and other ancillary service income. Our senior living operations segment revenues
decreased
in
2017
over the prior year primarily due to the transition of
eight
seniors housing communities to our triple-net leased properties segment and decreased occupancy at our seniors housing communities.
Property-level operating expenses related to our senior living operations segment include labor, food, utilities, marketing, management and other costs of operating the properties. Property-level operating expenses
increased
year over year primarily due to increases in salaries, benefits, insurance and other operating expenses and the implementation of new care technologies.
The following table compares results of operations for our
285
same-store senior living operating communities, unadjusted for foreign currency movements between periods. With regard to our senior living operations segment, “same-store” refers to properties owned, consolidated, operational and reported under a consistent business model for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding properties that transitioned operators since the start of the prior comparison period, assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Resident fees and services
$
1,791,843
$
1,765,183
$
26,660
1.5
%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(1,215,440
)
(1,187,351
)
(28,089
)
(2.4
)
Segment NOI
$
576,403
$
577,832
(1,429
)
(0.2
)
51
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy
for the Year Ended
December 31,
Average Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for
the Year Ended
December 31,
2017
2016
2017
2016
2017
2016
Same-store communities
285
285
88.3
%
90.4
%
$
5,745
$
5,526
Segment NOI—Office Operations
The following table summarizes results of operations in our office operations reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Office Operations:
Rental income
$
753,467
$
630,342
$
123,125
19.5
%
Office building services revenue
7,497
13,029
(5,532
)
(42.5
)
Total revenues
760,964
643,371
117,593
18.3
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(233,007
)
(191,784
)
(41,223
)
(21.5
)
Office building services costs
(3,391
)
(7,311
)
3,920
53.6
Segment NOI
$
524,566
$
444,276
80,290
18.1
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2017
2016
2017
2016
Total office buildings
391
388
92.0
%
91.7
%
$
32
$
31
The increase in our office operations segment rental income in
2017
over the prior year is attributed primarily to the office buildings we acquired during
2017
and
2016
, partially offset by dispositions. The increase in our office building property-level operating expenses is due primarily to those acquired office buildings and increases in real estate taxes and other operating expenses, partially offset by dispositions.
Office building services revenue and costs both decreased in
2017
over the prior year primarily due to decreased construction activity during
2017
compared to
2016
.
The following table compares results of operations for our
350
same-store office buildings. With regard to our office operations segment, “same-store” refers to properties owned, consolidated, operational and reported under a consistent business model for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Office Operations:
Rental income
$
558,575
$
552,045
$
6,530
1.2
%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(169,583
)
(164,987
)
(4,596
)
(2.8
)
Segment NOI
$
388,992
$
387,058
1,934
0.5
52
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2017
2016
2017
2016
Same-store office buildings
350
350
91.3
%
92.0
%
$
31
$
30
Segment NOI - All Other
All other
increased
in
2017
over the prior year due primarily to income from new loans issued during
2017
, partially offset by decreased interest income attributable to loan repayments received during
2016
and
2017
.
Interest and other income
Interest and other income increased
$5.2 million
in
2017
over the prior year as a result of fees received from a tenant in 2017 which were not associated with a lease agreement.
Interest Expense
The
$28.5 million
increase
in total interest expense, is attributed primarily to a
$17.1 million
increase in interest due to higher debt balances and an
$11.3 million
increase due to higher effective interest rates, including the amortization of any fair value adjustments. Our effective interest rate was
3.7%
for
2017
, compared to
3.6%
for
2016
.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense related to continuing operations
decreased
during
2017
compared to
2016
, primarily due to a decrease in amortization related to certain lease intangibles that were fully amortized during the third quarter of 2016, partially offset by a full year of depreciation and amortization related to the September 2016 Life Sciences Acquisition.
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt, Net
The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in
2017
resulted primarily from the repayment of term loans and the replacement of our previous
$2.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility. The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in
2016
was due to our redemption and repayment of
$550.0 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.55%
senior notes due 2016 and term loan repayments in 2016.
Merger-Related Expenses and Deal Costs
Merger-related expenses and deal costs consist of transition, integration, deal and severance-related expenses primarily related to pending and consummated transactions required by GAAP to be expensed rather than capitalized into the asset value. The
$14.1 million
decrease
in merger-related expenses and deal costs in
2017
over the prior year is primarily due to the September 2016 Life Sciences Acquisition.
Other
The
$10.1 million
increase
in other for
2017
over
2016
is primarily due to charges related to natural disasters. We have insurance coverage to mitigate the financial impact of these types of events. However, there can be no assurance regarding the amount or timing of any insurance recoveries. Such recoveries will be recognized when collection is deemed probable.
Income from Unconsolidated Entities
The
$4.9 million
decrease
in income from unconsolidated entities for
2017
over
2016
is primarily due to our share of net losses related to certain unconsolidated entities in
2017
partially offset by the February 2017 fair value re-measurement of our previously held equity interest, resulting in a gain on re-measurement of
$3.0 million
. Refer to “
NOTE 7—INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED ENTITIES
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.
53
Income Tax Benefit
The
2017
income tax benefit is primarily due to accounting for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “2017 Tax Act”), specifically a $64.5 million benefit from the reduced U.S. federal corporate tax rate on net deferred tax liabilities and an offsetting expense of $23.3 million to establish a valuation allowance on deferred interest carryforwards, losses of certain TRS entities and the release of a tax reserve. The
2016
income tax benefit was due primarily to losses of certain TRS entities, the reversal of a net deferred tax liability at one TRS and the release of a tax reserve. The TRS losses were mainly attributable to the depreciation and amortization of fixed and intangible assets recorded as deferred tax liabilities in purchase accounting.
Gain on Real Estate Dispositions
The increase of
$619.1 million
in gain on real estate dispositions for
2017
over
2016
is due primarily to the sale of
36
Kindred SNFs in 2017.
Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests
The increase in net income attributable to noncontrolling interests of
$2.4 million
for
2017
over
2016
is primarily due to the September 2016 Life Sciences Acquisition.
Years Ended
December 31, 2016
and
2015
The table below shows our results of operations for the years ended December 31,
2016
and
2015
and the effect of changes in those results from period to period on our net income attributable to common stockholders.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Net Income
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI:
Triple-net leased properties
$
850,755
$
784,234
$
66,521
8.5
%
Senior living operations
604,328
601,840
2,488
0.4
Office operations
444,276
399,891
44,385
11.1
All other
101,214
89,176
12,038
13.5
Total segment NOI
2,000,573
1,875,141
125,432
6.7
Interest and other income
876
1,052
(176
)
(16.7
)
Interest expense
(419,740
)
(367,114
)
(52,626
)
(14.3
)
Depreciation and amortization
(898,924
)
(894,057
)
(4,867
)
(0.5
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(126,875
)
(128,035
)
1,160
0.9
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(2,779
)
(14,411
)
11,632
80.7
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(24,635
)
(102,944
)
78,309
76.1
Other
(9,988
)
(17,957
)
7,969
44.4
Income before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interest
518,508
351,675
166,833
47.4
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
4,358
(1,420
)
5,778
nm
Income tax benefit
31,343
39,284
(7,941
)
(20.2
)
Income from continuing operations
554,209
389,539
164,670
42.3
Discontinued operations
(922
)
11,103
(12,025
)
nm
Gain on real estate dispositions
98,203
18,580
79,623
nm
Net income
651,490
419,222
232,268
55.4
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
2,259
1,379
(880
)
(63.8
)
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
649,231
$
417,843
231,388
55.4
nm—not meaningful
54
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties
The following table summarizes results of operations in our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
845,834
$
779,801
$
66,033
8.5
%
Other services revenue
4,921
4,433
488
11.0
Segment NOI
$
850,755
$
784,234
66,521
8.5
Triple-net leased properties segment NOI
increased
in
2016
over the prior year primarily due to rent from the properties we acquired and developed during
2016
and
2015
, contractual escalations in rent pursuant to the terms of our leases, and increases in base and other rent under certain of our leases, partially offset by 2015 lease termination fees.
The following table compares results of operations for our
511
same-store triple-net leased properties, unadjusted for foreign currency movements between comparison periods. With regard to our triple-net leased properties segment, “same-store” refers to properties owned, consolidated, operational and reported under a consistent business model for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Triple-Net Leased Properties:
Rental income
$
695,124
$
673,706
$
21,418
3.2
%
Segment NOI
$
695,124
$
673,706
21,418
3.2
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations
The following table summarizes results of operations in our senior living operations reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Resident fees and services
$
1,847,306
$
1,811,255
$
36,051
2.0
%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(1,242,978
)
(1,209,415
)
(33,563
)
(2.8
)
Segment NOI
$
604,328
$
601,840
2,488
0.4
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
Average
Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
Total communities
298
305
90.3
%
91.2
%
$
5,474
$
5,255
55
Resident fees and services
increased
in
2016
over the prior year primarily due to seniors housing communities we acquired during 2015 and an increase in average monthly revenue per occupied room, partially offset by decreased occupancy at our seniors housing communities.
Property-level operating expenses also
increased
year over year primarily due to the acquired properties described above and increases in salaries, bonus, benefits, insurance, real estate tax expenses and other operating expenses.
The following table compares results of operations for our
262
same-store senior living operating communities, unadjusted for foreign currency movements between periods. With regard to our senior living operations segment, “same-store” refers to properties that we owned and were operational for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding properties that transitioned operators since the start of the prior comparison period, assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Senior Living Operations:
Total revenues
$
1,667,279
$
1,617,757
$
49,522
3.1
%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(1,116,109
)
(1,077,510
)
(38,599
)
(3.6
)
Segment NOI
$
551,170
$
540,247
10,923
2.0
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Average Unit
Occupancy for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
Average
Monthly Revenue Per Occupied Room for
the Year
Ended
December 31,
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
Same-store communities
262
262
90.4
%
91.1
%
$
5,578
$
5,379
Segment NOI—Office Operations
The following table summarizes results of operations in our office operations reportable business segment, including assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
, but excluding assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations:
For the Year Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease) to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Segment NOI—Office Operations:
Rental income
$
630,342
$
566,245
$
64,097
11.3
%
Office building services revenue
13,029
34,436
(21,407
)
(62.2
)
Total revenues
643,371
600,681
42,690
7.1
Less:
Property-level operating expenses
(191,784
)
(174,225
)
(17,559
)
(10.1
)
Office building services costs
(7,311
)
(26,565
)
19,254
72.5
Segment NOI
$
444,276
$
399,891
44,385
11.1
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
Total office buildings
388
369
91.7
%
91.7
%
$
31
$
29
56
The increase in our office operations segment rental income in
2016
over the prior year is attributed primarily to the MOBs we acquired during
2016
and
2015
and the Life Sciences Acquisition, as well as in-place lease escalations. The increase in our office building property-level operating expenses is due primarily to those acquired MOBs and life science and innovation centers and increases in real estate taxes and other operating expenses.
Office building services revenue and costs both decreased in
2016
over the prior year primarily due to decreased construction activity during
2016
compared to
2015
.
The following table compares results of operations for our
272
same-store office buildings. With regard to our office operations segment, “same-store” refers to properties owned, consolidated, operational and reported under a consistent business model for the full period in both comparison periods, excluding assets sold or classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2016
and assets whose operations were classified as discontinued operations.
For the Year Ended
December 31,
(Decrease) Increase
to Segment NOI
2016
2015
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Same-Store Segment NOI—Office Operations:
Rental income
$
432,657
$
434,022
$
(1,365
)
(0.3
)%
Less: Property-level operating expenses
(142,826
)
(144,218
)
1,392
1.0
Segment NOI
$
289,831
$
289,804
27
0.0
Number of
Properties at
December 31,
Occupancy at
December 31,
Annualized Average Rent Per Occupied Square Foot for the Year Ended December 31,
2016
2015
2016
2015
2016
2015
Same-store office buildings
272
272
90.6
%
91.2
%
$
31
$
31
Segment NOI - All Other
All other increased in 2016 over the prior year due primarily to a February 2016 $140.0 million secured mezzanine loan investment that has an annual interest rate of 9.95%, partially offset by decreased interest income due to loans repaid during 2016.
Interest Expense
The $7.8 million decrease in total interest expense, including interest allocated to discontinued operations of $60.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, is attributed primarily to an $11.5 million reduction in interest due to lower debt balances, partially offset by a $3.7 million increase due to higher effective interest rates, including the amortization of any fair value adjustments. Our effective interest rate was 3.63% for 2016, compared to 3.60% for 2015.
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt, Net
The loss on extinguishment of debt, net in 2016 and 2015 resulted primarily from various debt repayments we made to improve our credit profile. The 2016 activity related to the redemption and repayment of the $550.0 million aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our 1.55% senior notes due 2016 and term loan repayments. The 2015 repayments were made primarily with proceeds from the distribution paid to us at the time of the CCP Spin-Off.
Merger-Related Expenses and Deal Costs
The $78.3 million decrease in merger-related expenses and deal costs in 2016 over the prior year is primarily due to the January 2015 acquisition of American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. and the August 2015 acquisition of Ardent Health Services, Inc., partially offset by costs incurred relating to the September 2016 Life Sciences Acquisition.
57
Income Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit for 2016 was due primarily to losses of certain TRS entities, the reversal of a net deferred tax liability at one TRS and the release of a tax reserve. Income tax benefit for 2015 was due primarily to the income tax benefit of ordinary losses of certain TRS entities. The TRS losses were mainly attributable to the depreciation and amortization of fixed and intangible assets recorded as deferred tax liabilities in purchase accounting.
Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations for 2016 reflects $0.9 million of separation costs relating to the CCP Spin-Off. Discontinued operations for 2015 are primarily the result of $46.4 million of transaction and separation costs associated with the CCP Spin-Off and net income for the CCP operations from January 1, 2015 through August 17, 2015, the date of the CCP Spin-Off.
Gain on Real Estate Dispositions
The $79.6 million increase in gain on real estate dispositions in 2016 over the same period in 2015 primarily relates to the 2016 sale of one triple-net leased property.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We consider certain non-GAAP financial measures to be useful supplemental measures of our operating performance. A non-GAAP financial measure is a measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are not so excluded from or included in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Described below are the non-GAAP financial measures used by management to evaluate our operating performance and that we consider most useful to investors, together with reconciliations of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.
The non-GAAP financial measures we present in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may not be comparable to those presented by other real estate companies due to the fact that not all real estate companies use the same definitions. You should not consider these measures as alternatives to net income or income from continuing operations (both determined in accordance with GAAP) as indicators of our financial performance or as alternatives to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as measures of our liquidity, nor are these measures necessarily indicative of sufficient cash flow to fund all of our needs. In order to facilitate a clear understanding of our consolidated historical operating results, you should examine these measures in conjunction with net income and income from continuing operations as presented in our Consolidated Financial Statements and other financial data included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Funds From Operations and Normalized Funds From Operations
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. However, since real estate values historically have risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors deem presentations of operating results for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. For that reason, we consider Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and normalized FFO to be appropriate supplemental measures of operating performance of an equity REIT. In particular, we believe that normalized FFO is useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to compare our operating performance to the operating performance of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis without having to account for differences caused by non-recurring items and other non-operational events such as transactions and litigation. In some cases, we provide information about identified non-cash components of FFO and normalized FFO because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess the impact of those items on our financial results.
We use the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) definition of FFO. NAREIT defines FFO as net income attributable to common stockholders (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains or losses from sales of real estate property, including gains or losses on re-measurement of equity method investments, and impairment write-downs of depreciable real estate, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures will be calculated to reflect FFO on the same basis. We define normalized FFO as FFO excluding the following income and expense items (which may be recurring in nature): (a) merger-related costs and expenses, including amortization of intangibles, transition and integration expenses, and deal costs and expenses, including expenses and recoveries relating to acquisition lawsuits; (b) the impact of any expenses related to asset impairment and valuation allowances, the write-off of unamortized deferred financing fees, or
58
additional costs, expenses, discounts, make-whole payments, penalties or premiums incurred as a result of early retirement or payment of our debt; (c) the non-cash effect of income tax benefits or expenses, the non-cash impact of changes to our executive equity compensation plan and derivative transactions that have non-cash mark-to-market impacts on our Consolidated Statements of Income; (d) the financial impact of contingent consideration, severance-related costs and charitable donations made to the Ventas Charitable Foundation; (e) gains and losses for non-operational foreign currency hedge agreements and changes in the fair value of financial instruments; (f) gains and losses on non-real estate dispositions and other unusual items related to unconsolidated entities; (g) expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements and related matters; and (h) net expenses or recoveries related to natural disasters.
We believe that income from continuing operations is the most comparable GAAP measure because it provides insight into our continuing operations.
59
The following table summarizes our FFO and normalized FFO for each of the five years ended
December 31, 2017
. Our normalized FFO for the year ended
December 31, 2017
increased over the prior year due primarily to improved property performance and accretive investments.
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
(In thousands)
Income from continuing operations
$
643,949
$
554,209
$
389,539
$
359,296
$
375,498
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
11,103
99,735
79,171
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
18,580
17,970
—
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
419,222
477,001
454,669
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
1,234
1,160
Net income attributable to common stockholders
1,356,470
649,231
417,843
475,767
453,509
Adjustments:
Real estate depreciation and amortization
881,088
891,985
887,126
718,649
624,245
Real estate depreciation related to noncontrolling interests
(7,565
)
(7,785
)
(7,906
)
(10,314
)
(10,512
)
Real estate depreciation related to unconsolidated entities
4,231
5,754
7,353
5,792
6,543
(Gain) loss on real estate dispositions related to unconsolidated entities
(1,057
)
(439
)
19
—
—
(Gain) loss on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
(3,027
)
—
176
—
(1,241
)
Gain on real estate dispositions related to noncontrolling interests
18
—
—
—
—
Gain on real estate dispositions
(717,273
)
(98,203
)
(18,580
)
(17,970
)
—
Discontinued operations:
Loss (gain) on real estate dispositions
—
1
(231
)
(1,494
)
(4,059
)
Depreciation on real estate assets
—
—
79,608
103,250
139,973
FFO attributable to common stockholders
1,512,885
1,440,544
1,365,408
1,273,680
1,208,458
Adjustments:
Change in fair value of financial instruments
(41
)
62
460
5,121
449
Non-cash income tax benefit
(22,387
)
(34,227
)
(42,384
)
(9,431
)
(11,828
)
Effect of the 2017 Tax Act
(36,539
)
—
—
—
—
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
839
2,779
15,797
5,013
1,048
Gain on non-real estate dispositions related to unconsolidated entities
(39
)
(557
)
—
—
—
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
14,823
28,290
152,344
54,389
21,560
Amortization of other intangibles
1,458
1,752
2,058
1,246
1,022
Other items related to unconsolidated entities
3,188
—
—
—
—
Non-cash impact of changes to equity plan
5,453
—
—
—
—
Natural disaster expenses (recoveries), net
11,601
—
—
—
—
Normalized FFO attributable to common stockholders
$
1,491,241
$
1,438,643
$
1,493,683
$
1,330,018
$
1,220,709
60
Adjusted EBITDA
We consider Adjusted EBITDA an important supplemental measure because it provides another manner in which to evaluate our operating performance and serves as another indicator of our credit strength and our ability to service our debt obligations. We define Adjusted EBITDA
as consolidated earnings, which includes amounts in discontinued operations, before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (including non-cash stock-based compensation expense), excluding gains or losses on extinguishment of debt, our consolidated joint venture partners’ share of EBITDA, merger-related expenses and deal costs, expenses related to the re-audit and re-review in 2014 of our historical financial statements, net gains or losses on real estate activity, gains or losses on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, changes in the fair value of financial instruments, unrealized foreign currency gains or losses and net expenses or recoveries related to natural disasters, and including our share of EBITDA from unconsolidated entities and adjustments for other immaterial or identified items.
The following table sets forth a reconciliation of income from continuing operations to Adjusted EBITDA for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
:
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Income from continuing operations
$
643,949
$
554,209
$
389,539
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
18,580
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
Net income attributable to common stockholders
1,356,470
649,231
417,843
Adjustments:
Interest
448,196
419,740
427,542
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
754
2,779
14,411
Taxes (including amounts in general, administrative and professional fees)
(57,307
)
(29,129
)
(37,112
)
Depreciation and amortization
887,948
898,924
973,665
Non-cash stock-based compensation expense
26,543
20,958
19,537
Merger-related expenses, deal costs and re-audit costs
12,653
25,141
150,290
Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests, net of consolidated joint venture partners’ share of EBITDA
(12,975
)
(12,654
)
(12,722
)
(Income) loss from unconsolidated entities, net of Ventas share of EBITDA from unconsolidated entities
32,219
25,246
18,806
Gain on real estate dispositions
(717,273
)
(98,202
)
(18,811
)
Unrealized foreign currency gains
(612
)
(1,440
)
(1,727
)
Changes in fair value of financial instruments
(61
)
51
460
(Gain) loss on re-measurement of equity interest upon acquisition, net
(3,027
)
—
176
Natural disaster expenses (recoveries), net
11,601
—
—
Adjusted EBITDA
$
1,985,129
$
1,900,645
$
1,952,358
NOI
We also consider NOI an important supplemental measure because it allows investors, analysts and our management to assess our unlevered property-level operating results and to compare our operating results with those of other real estate companies and between periods on a consistent basis. We define NOI
as total revenues, less interest and other income, property-level operating expenses and office building services costs
. Cash receipts may differ due to straight-line recognition of certain rental income and the application of other GAAP policies. The following table sets forth a reconciliation of income
61
from continuing operations to NOI for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
:
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Income from continuing operations
$
643,949
$
554,209
$
389,539
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
18,580
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
Net income attributable to common stockholders
1,356,470
649,231
417,843
Adjustments:
Interest and other income
(6,034
)
(876
)
(1,115
)
Interest
448,196
419,740
427,542
Depreciation and amortization
887,948
898,924
973,665
General, administrative and professional fees
135,490
126,875
128,044
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
754
2,779
14,411
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
10,645
25,556
149,346
Other
20,052
9,988
19,577
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,499
Loss (income) from unconsolidated entities
561
(4,358
)
1,420
Income tax benefit
(59,799
)
(31,343
)
(39,284
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
(717,273
)
(98,202
)
(18,811
)
NOI (including amounts in discontinued operations)
2,081,652
2,000,573
2,074,137
Discontinued operations
—
—
(198,996
)
NOI (excluding amounts in discontinued operations)
$
2,081,652
$
2,000,573
$
1,875,141
Asset/Liability Management
Asset/liability management, a key element of enterprise risk management, is designed to support the achievement of our business strategy, while ensuring that we maintain appropriate and tolerable levels of market risk (primarily interest rate risk and foreign currency exchange risk) and credit risk. Effective management of these risks is a contributing factor to the absolute levels and variability of our FFO and net worth. The following discussion addresses our integrated management of assets and liabilities, including the use of derivative financial instruments.
Market Risk
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates with respect to borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility and our unsecured term loans, certain of our mortgage loans that are floating rate obligations, mortgage loans receivable that bear interest at floating rates and marketable debt securities. These market risks result primarily from changes in LIBOR rates or prime rates. To manage these risks, we continuously monitor our level of floating rate debt with respect to total debt and other factors, including our assessment of current and future economic conditions.
62
The table below sets forth certain information with respect to our debt, excluding premiums and discounts.
As of December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(Dollars in thousands)
Balance:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other, unhedged portion
$
8,218,369
$
7,854,264
$
7,534,459
Floating to fixed rate swap on term loan
200,000
200,000
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
1,010,517
1,426,837
1,554,062
Variable rate:
Fixed to floating rate swap on senior notes
400,000
—
—
Unsecured revolving credit facility
535,832
146,538
180,683
Unsecured term loans, unhedged portion
700,000
1,271,215
1,568,477
Secured revolving construction credit facility
2,868
—
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
298,047
292,060
433,339
Total
$
11,365,633
$
11,190,914
$
11,271,020
Percent of total debt:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other, unhedged portion
72.3
%
70.2
%
66.9
%
Floating to fixed rate swap on term loan
1.8
1.8
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
8.9
12.7
13.8
Variable rate:
Fixed to floating rate swap on senior notes
3.5
—
—
Unsecured revolving credit facility
4.7
1.3
1.6
Unsecured term loans, unhedged portion
6.2
11.4
13.9
Secured revolving construction credit facility
0.0
—
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
2.6
2.6
3.8
Total
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Weighted average interest rate at end of period:
Fixed rate:
Senior notes and other, unhedged portion
3.7
%
3.6
%
3.5
%
Floating to fixed rate swap on term loan
2.1
2.2
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
5.2
5.6
5.7
Variable rate:
Fixed to floating rate swap on senior notes
2.3
—
—
Unsecured revolving credit facility
2.3
1.9
1.4
Unsecured term loans, unhedged portion
2.3
1.7
1.4
Secured revolving construction credit facility
3.1
—
—
Mortgage loans and other
(1)
2.9
2.1
2.0
Total
3.6
3.6
3.5
(1)
Excludes mortgage debt of
$57.4 million
and
$22.9 million
related to real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
and
2015
, respectively. All amounts were included in liabilities related to assets held for sale on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The variable rate debt in the table above reflects, in part, the effect of
$549.9 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from March 2018 to January 2023 that effectively convert fixed rate debt to variable rate debt. In addition, the fixed rate debt in the table above reflects, in part, the effect of
$250.9 million
notional amount of interest rate
63
swaps with maturities ranging from October 2018 to September 2027, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt.
In February 2016, we entered into a
$200 million
notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at
1.132%
through the maturity date of the swap.
In July 2016, we entered into
$225 million
notional forward starting swaps that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates between July and the September issuance of
3.25%
senior notes due 2026. On the issuance date, we realized a gain of
$1.9 million
from these swaps that is being recognized over the life of the notes using an effective interest method.
In January and February 2017, we entered into a total of
$275 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of April 3, 2017 that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.33%
. In March 2017, these swaps were terminated in conjunction with the issuance of the
3.850%
senior notes due 2027, which resulted in a
$0.8 million
gain that is being recognized over the life of the notes using the effective interest method.
In March 2017, we entered into interest rate swaps totaling a notional amount of
$400.0 million
with a maturity of January 15, 2023, effectively converting fixed rate debt to three month LIBOR-based floating rate debt. As a result, we will receive a fixed rate on the swap of
3.10%
and will pay a floating rate equal to three month LIBOR plus a weighted average swap spread of
0.98%
.
In June 2017, we entered into a total of
$125 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of January 15, 2018 and a maturity of January 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.1832%
.
In December 2017, we entered into a total of
$75 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of February 15, 2018 and a maturity of February 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.3705%
The
increase
in our outstanding variable rate debt at
December 31, 2017
compared to
December 31, 2016
is primarily attributable to the
$400.0 million
notional amount interest rate swap mentioned above and increased borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility, partially offset by term loan repayments.
Pursuant to the terms of certain leases with one of our tenants, if interest rates increase on certain variable rate debt that we have totaling
$80.0 million
as of
December 31, 2017
, our tenant is required to pay us additional rent (on a dollar-for-dollar basis) in an amount equal to the increase in interest expense resulting from the increased interest rates. Therefore, the increase in interest expense related to this debt is equally offset by an increase in additional rent due to us from the tenant. Assuming a 100 basis point increase in the weighted average interest rate related to our variable rate debt and assuming no change in our variable rate debt outstanding as of
December 31, 2017
, interest expense for
2018
would increase by approximately
$18.2 million
, or
$0.05
per diluted common share.
As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, our joint venture partners’ aggregate share of total debt was
$76.7 million
and
$80.9 million
, respectively, with respect to certain properties we owned through consolidated joint ventures. Total debt does not include our portion of debt related to investments in unconsolidated entities, which was
$90.3 million
and
$122.0 million
as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively.
The fair value of our fixed and variable rate debt is based on current interest rates at which we could obtain similar borrowings. For fixed rate debt, interest rate fluctuations generally affect the fair value, but not our earnings or cash flows. Therefore, interest rate risk does not have a significant impact on our fixed rate debt obligations until their maturity or earlier prepayment and refinancing. If interest rates have risen at the time we seek to refinance our fixed rate debt, whether at maturity or otherwise, our future earnings and cash flows could be adversely affected by additional borrowing costs. Conversely, lower interest rates at the time of refinancing may reduce our overall borrowing costs.
64
To highlight the sensitivity of our fixed rate debt to changes in interest rates, the following summary shows the effects of a hypothetical instantaneous change of 100 basis points in interest rates as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
As of December 31,
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Gross book value
$
9,428,886
$
9,481,101
Fair value
(1)
9,640,893
9,600,621
Fair value reflecting change in interest rates
(1)
:
-100 basis points
10,148,313
10,117,238
+100 basis points
9,184,409
9,133,292
(1)
The change in fair value of our fixed rate debt from
December 31, 2016
to
December 31, 2017
was due primarily to changes in the fair market value interest rates and 2017 senior note issuances, partially offset by repayments of senior notes and fixed rate mortgage debt.
As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, the fair value of our secured and non-mortgage loans receivable, based on our estimates of currently prevailing rates for comparable loans, was
$1.3 billion
and
$709.6 million
, respectively. See “
NOTE 6—LOANS RECEIVABLE AND INVESTMENTS
” and “
NOTE 11—FAIR VALUES OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As a result of our Canadian and United Kingdom operations, we are subject to fluctuations in certain foreign currency exchange rates that may, from time to time, affect our financial condition and operating performance. Based solely on our results for the year ended
December 31, 2017
(including the impact of existing hedging arrangements), if the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the British pound and Canadian dollar were to increase or decrease by one standard deviation compared to the average exchange rate during the year, our normalized FFO per share for the year ended
December 31, 2017
would decrease or increase, as applicable, by less than $0.01 per share or 0.1%. We will continue to mitigate these risks through a layered approach to hedging looking out for the next year and continual assessment of our foreign operational capital structure. Nevertheless, we cannot assure you that any such fluctuations will not have an effect on our earnings.
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, the amount of foreign currency translation loss included in accumulated other comprehensive loss on our Consolidated Balance Sheets decreased by
$20.6 million
, primarily as a result of the remeasurement of our properties located in the United Kingdom.
65
Concentration and Credit Risk
We use concentration ratios to identify, understand and evaluate the potential impact of economic downturns and other adverse events that may affect our asset types, geographic locations, business models, and tenants, operators and managers. We evaluate concentration risk in terms of investment mix and operations mix. Investment mix measures the percentage of our investments that is concentrated in a specific asset type or that is operated or managed by a particular tenant, operator or manager. Operations mix measures the percentage of our operating results that is attributed to a particular tenant, operator or manager, geographic location or business model. The following tables reflect our concentration risk as of the dates and for the periods presented:
As of
December 31,
2017
2016
Investment mix by asset type
(1)
:
Seniors housing communities
60.2
%
61.8
%
MOBs
19.7
20.7
Life science and innovation centers
7.4
6.1
Health systems
5.4
5.6
IRFs and LTACs
1.7
1.7
SNFs
0.7
1.4
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
4.9
2.7
Investment mix by tenant, operator and manager
(1)
:
Atria
22.3
%
22.6
%
Sunrise
10.8
11.3
Brookdale Senior Living
7.5
8.1
Ardent
4.9
5.1
Kindred
1.1
1.8
All other
53.4
51.1
(1)
Ratios are based on the gross book value of consolidated real estate investments (excluding properties classified as held for sale) as of each reporting date.
66
For the Year Ended
December 31,
2017
2016
2015
Operations mix by tenant and operator and business model:
Revenues
(1)
:
Senior living operations
51.6
%
53.6
%
55.1
%
Brookdale Senior Living
(2)
4.7
4.8
5.3
Ardent
3.1
3.1
1.3
Kindred
4.7
5.4
5.7
All others
35.7
33.1
32.6
Adjusted EBITDA
(3)
:
Senior living operations
28.7
%
30.9
%
29.7
%
Brookdale Senior Living
(2)
7.6
7.9
8.2
Ardent
5.1
5.1
2.0
Kindred
7.7
8.9
8.8
All others
50.9
47.2
51.3
NOI
(4)
:
Senior living operations
28.5
%
30.2
%
32.1
%
Brookdale Senior Living
(2)
8.0
8.3
9.3
Ardent
5.3
5.3
2.3
Kindred
8.1
9.2
9.9
All others
49.9
47.0
46.4
Operations mix by geographic location
(5)
:
California
15.3
%
15.3
%
15.4
%
New York
8.6
8.8
8.8
Texas
5.8
6.3
6.1
Illinois
4.8
4.9
4.9
Florida
4.4
4.5
4.6
All others
61.1
60.2
60.2
(1)
Total revenues include medical office building and other services revenue, revenue from loans and investments and interest and other income (excluding amounts in discontinued operations and including amounts related to assets classified as held for sale).
(2)
Excludes one seniors housing community included in the senior living operations reportable business segment.
(3)
Includes amounts in discontinued operations.
(4)
Excludes amounts in discontinued operations.
(5)
Ratios are based on total revenues (excluding amounts in discontinued operations and including amounts related to assets classified as held for sale) for each period presented.
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional disclosure and reconciliations of income from continuing operations, as computed in accordance with GAAP, to Adjusted EBITDA and NOI, respectively.
We derive a significant portion of our revenues by leasing assets under long-term triple-net leases in which the rental rate is generally fixed with annual escalators, subject to certain limitations. Some of our triple-net lease escalators are contingent upon the satisfaction of specified facility revenue parameters or based on increases in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”), with caps, floors or collars. We also earn revenues directly from individual residents in our seniors housing communities that are managed by independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, and tenants in our office buildings. For the year ended
December 31, 2017
,
52.9%
of our Adjusted EBITDA (including amounts in discontinued operations) was derived from our senior living operations and office operations, for which rental rates may fluctuate more frequently upon lease rollovers and renewals due to shorter term leases and changing economic or market conditions.
67
The concentration of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and operating income that are attributed to Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred creates credit risk. If any of Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline, and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be impaired. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
Our leases and other agreements with Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred to satisfy its obligations under our agreements could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and “
NOTE 3—CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We regularly monitor and assess any changes in the relative credit risk of our significant tenants, and in particular those tenants that have recourse obligations under our triple-net leases. The ratios and metrics we use to evaluate a significant tenant’s liquidity and creditworthiness depend on facts and circumstances specific to that tenant and the industry or industries in which it operates, including without limitation the tenant’s credit history and economic conditions related to the tenant, its operations and the markets in which the tenant operates, that may vary over time. Among other things, we may (i) review and analyze information regarding the real estate, seniors housing and healthcare industries generally, publicly available information regarding the significant tenant, and information required to be provided by the tenant under the terms of its lease agreements with us, (ii) examine monthly and/or quarterly financial statements of the significant tenant to the extent publicly available or otherwise provided under the terms of our lease agreements, and (iii) participate in periodic discussions and in-person meetings with representatives of the significant tenant. Using this information, we calculate multiple financial ratios (which may, but do not necessarily, include net debt to EBITDAR or EBITDARM, fixed charge coverage and tangible net worth), after making certain adjustments based on our judgment, and assess other metrics we deem relevant to an understanding of the significant tenant’s credit risk.
Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants. However, we rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on Atria and Sunrise to set appropriate resident fees, to provide accurate property-level financials results for our properties in a timely manner and otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under the agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
The properties managed by Atria and Sunrise account for a significant portion of our revenues and operating income; adverse developments in Atria’s or Sunrise’s business and affairs or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” and “—
We have rights to terminate our management agreements with Atria and Sunrise in whole or with respect to specific properties under certain circumstances, and we may be unable to replace Atria or Sunrise if our management agreements are terminated or not renewed
” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our
34%
ownership interest in Atria entitles us to certain rights and minority protections, as well as the right to appoint
two
of
six
members on the Atria Board of Directors.
Triple-Net Lease Expirations
If our tenants are not able or willing to renew our triple-net leases upon expiration, we may be unable to reposition the applicable properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all. Although our lease expirations are staggered, the non-renewal of some or all of our triple-net leases that expire in any given year could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we had no triple-net lease renewals or expirations without renewal that, in the aggregate, had a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations for that period. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Business—
If we must replace any of our tenants or operators, we might be unable to reposition the properties on as favorable terms, or at all, and we could be subject to delays, limitations and expenses, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us
” included in Part I, Item IA of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
68
The following table summarizes our triple-net lease expirations currently scheduled to occur over the next ten years (excluding leases related to assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
):
Number of
Properties
2017 Annual Rental Income
% of 2017 Total Triple-Net Leased Properties Segment Rental Income
(Dollars in thousands)
2018
—
$
—
—
%
2019
70
120,625
14.4
2020
42
36,129
4.3
2021
53
52,509
6.3
2022
26
18,536
2.2
2023
10
30,542
3.6
2024
36
22,487
2.7
2025
59
128,433
15.3
2026
47
42,632
5.1
2027
7
8,625
1.0
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had a total of
$81.4 million
of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, operating cash and cash related to our senior living operations and office operations reportable business segments that is deposited and held in property-level accounts. Funds maintained in the property-level accounts are used primarily for the payment of property-level expenses, debt service payments and certain capital expenditures. As of
December 31, 2017
, we also had escrow deposits and restricted cash of
$106.9 million
,
$2.4 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility and
$397.1 million
of unused borrowing capacity available under our secured revolving credit facility.
During
2017
, our principal sources of liquidity were cash flows from operations, proceeds from the issuance of debt securities, proceeds from asset sales and cash on hand.
For the next 12 months, our principal liquidity needs are to: (i) fund operating expenses; (ii) meet our debt service requirements; (iii) repay maturing mortgage and other debt, including
$700.0 million
of senior notes; (iv) fund capital expenditures; (v) fund acquisitions, investments and commitments, including development and redevelopment activities; and (vi) make distributions to our stockholders and unitholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT. In addition, we may elect to prepay outstanding indebtedness prior to maturity based on our analysis of various factors. We expect that these liquidity needs generally will be satisfied by a combination of the following: cash flows from operations, cash on hand, debt assumptions and financings (including secured financings), issuances of debt and equity securities, dispositions of assets (in whole or in part through joint venture arrangements with third parties) and borrowings under our revolving credit facilities. However, an inability to access liquidity through multiple capital sources concurrently could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. See “Risk Factors—Risks Arising from Our Capital Structure—
Limitations on our ability to access capital could have an adverse effect on our ability to make required payments on our debt obligations, make distributions to our stockholders or make future investments necessary to implement our business strategy
” included in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Credit Facilities and Unsecured Term Loans
In April 2017, we entered into an unsecured credit facility comprised of a
$3.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility, priced at LIBOR plus
0.875%
, that replaced our previous
$2.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility priced at LIBOR plus
1.0%
. The new unsecured credit facility was also comprised of our $200.0 million term loan that was scheduled to mature in 2018 and our
$278.6 million
term loan that was scheduled to mature in 2019. The 2018 and 2019 term loans were priced at LIBOR plus
1.05%
. In August 2017, we used most of the proceeds from the sale of
22
SNFs to repay the balances then outstanding on the 2018 and 2019 term loans, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$0.5 million
. See "
NOTE 5—DISPOSITIONS
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
69
The unsecured revolving credit facility matures in 2021, but may be extended at our option subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions for
two
additional periods of
six
months each. The unsecured revolving credit facility also includes an accordion feature that permits us to increase our aggregate borrowing capacity thereunder to up to
$3.75 billion
.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$535.8 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$14.5 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$2.4 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we also had a
$900.0 million
term loan due 2020 priced at LIBOR plus
0.975%
.
In September 2017, we entered into a new
$400.0 million
secured revolving construction credit facility which matures in 2022 and will be primarily used to finance life science and innovation center and other construction projects. As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$2.9 million
borrowings outstanding under the secured revolving construction credit facility.
The agreements governing our credit facilities require us to comply with various financial and other restrictive covenants. See “
NOTE 10—SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND OTHER DEBT
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We were in compliance with all of these covenants at
December 31, 2017
.
Senior Notes
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$7.6 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership (“Ventas Realty”), and guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. outstanding as follows:
•
$700.0 million
principal amount of 2.00% senior notes due 2018 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 4.00% senior notes due 2019 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 2.700% senior notes due 2020 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$700.0 million
principal amount of 4.750% senior notes due 2021 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 4.25% senior notes due 2022 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 3.25% senior notes due 2022 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.125% senior notes due 2023;
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.100% senior notes due 2023;
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.750% senior notes due 2024;
•
$600.0 million
principal amount of 3.500% senior notes due 2025;
•
$500.0 million
principal amount of 4.125% senior notes due 2026;
•
$450.0 million
principal amount of 3.25% senior notes due 2026;
•
$400.0 million
principal amount of 3.850% senior notes due 2027;
•
$258.8 million
principal amount of 5.45% senior notes due 2043 (co-issued with Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation);
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 5.70% senior notes due 2043; and
70
•
$300.0 million
principal amount of 4.375% senior notes due 2045.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$75.4 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our subsidiary, Nationwide Health Properties, LLC (“NHP LLC”), as successor to NHP, outstanding as follows:
•
$52.4 million
principal amount of 6.90% senior notes due 2037 (subject to earlier repayment at the option of the holder); and
•
$23.0 million
principal amount of 6.59% senior notes due 2038 (subject to earlier repayment at the option of the holder).
In addition, as of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$0.9 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes of our wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited, and guaranteed by Ventas, Inc. outstanding as follows:
•
$318.0 million
(C$400.0 million) principal amount of 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019;
•
$198.8 million
(C$250.0 million) principal amount of 3.300% senior notes, Series C due 2022;
•
$218.7 million
(C$275.0 million) principal amount of 2.55% senior notes, series D due 2023; and
•
$198.8 million
(C$250.0 million) principal amount of 4.125% senior notes, series B due 2024.
In May 2016, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.125%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.343%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.4 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In June 2016, we redeemed
$455.5 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.55%
senior notes due September 2016 at a public offering price of
100.335%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.1 million
. The redemption was funded using proceeds from our May 2016 senior note issuance, cash on hand and borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility. In July 2016, we repaid the remaining balance then outstanding of our
1.55%
senior notes due September 2016 of
$94.5 million
and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$0.3 million
.
In September 2016, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$450.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.25%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.811%
of par, for total proceeds of
$449.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In March 2017, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.100%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.280%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.850%
senior notes due 2027 at a public offering price equal to
99.196%
of par, for total proceeds of
$396.8 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In April 2017, we repaid in full, at par,
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 upon maturity.
In June 2017, Ventas Canada Finance Limited issued and sold
C$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.55%
senior notes, Series D due 2023 at a price equal to
99.954%
of par, for total proceeds of
C$274.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada. We used part of the proceeds to repay
C$124.4 million
on our unsecured term loan due 2019.
We may, from time to time, seek to retire or purchase our outstanding senior notes for cash or in exchange for equity securities in open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. Such repurchases or exchanges, if any, will depend on prevailing market conditions, our liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions, prospects for future access to capital and other factors. The amounts involved may be material.
The indentures governing our outstanding senior notes require us to comply with various financial and other restrictive covenants. See “
NOTE 10—SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND OTHER DEBT
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We were in compliance with all of these covenants at
December 31, 2017
.
71
Mortgage Loan Obligations
At
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, our consolidated aggregate principal amount of mortgage debt outstanding was
$1.3 billion
and
$1.7 billion
, of which our share was
$1.2 billion
and
$1.6 billion
, respectively.
For the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and 2015, we repaid in full mortgage loans in the aggregate principal amounts of
$411.4 million
,
$337.8 million
and
$461.9 million
, respectively.
Under certain circumstances, contractual and legal restrictions, including those contained in the instruments governing our subsidiaries’ outstanding mortgage indebtedness, may restrict our ability to obtain cash from our subsidiaries for the purpose of meeting our debt service obligations, including our payment guarantees with respect to Ventas Realty’s and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes.
See “
NOTE 4—ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PROPERTY
” and “
NOTE 10—SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND OTHER DEBT
” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Derivatives and Hedging
In February 2016, we entered into a
$200 million
notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at
1.132%
through the maturity date of the swap.
In July 2016, we entered into
$225 million
notional forward starting swaps that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates between July and the September issuance of
3.25%
senior notes due 2026. On the issuance date, we realized a gain of
$1.9 million
from these swaps that is being recognized over the life of the notes using an effective interest method.
In January and February 2017, we entered into a total of
$275 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of April 3, 2017 that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.33%
. In March 2017, these swaps were terminated in conjunction with the issuance of the
3.850%
senior notes due 2027, which resulted in a
$0.8 million
gain that is being recognized over the life of the notes using the effective interest method.
In March 2017, we entered into interest rate swaps totaling a notional amount of
$400 million
with a maturity of January 15, 2023, effectively converting fixed rate debt to three month LIBOR-based floating rate debt. As a result, we will receive a fixed rate on the swap of
3.10%
and will pay a floating rate equal to three month LIBOR plus a weighted average swap spread of
0.98%
.
In June 2017, we entered into a total of
$125 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of January 15, 2018 and a maturity of January 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.1832%
.
In December 2017, we entered into a total of
$75 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of February 15, 2018 and a maturity of February 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.3705%
Dividends
In order to continue to qualify as a REIT, we must make annual distributions to our stockholders of at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (excluding net capital gain). In addition, we will be subject to income tax at the regular corporate rate to the extent we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, including any net capital gains. In
2017
, our Board of Directors declared dividends on our common stock aggregating
$3.115
per share, which exceeds 100% of our
2017
estimated taxable income after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards. We paid the first three quarterly installments of our 2017 dividend of
$0.775
per share during
2017
. In December 2017, we declared the fourth quarter cash dividend on our common stock of
$0.79
per share, which was paid in January 2018. We intend to pay dividends greater than 100% of our taxable income, after the use of any net operating loss carryforwards, for
2018
.
72
We expect that our cash flows will exceed our REIT taxable income due to depreciation and other non-cash deductions in computing REIT taxable income and that we will be able to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement. However, from time to time, we may not have sufficient cash on hand or other liquid assets to meet this requirement or we may decide to retain cash or distribute such greater amount as may be necessary to avoid income and excise taxation. If we do not have sufficient cash on hand or other liquid assets to enable us to satisfy the 90% distribution requirement, or if we desire to retain cash, we may borrow funds, issue additional equity securities, pay taxable stock dividends, if possible, distribute other property or securities or engage in a transaction intended to enable us to meet the REIT distribution requirements or any combination of the foregoing.
Capital Expenditures
The terms of our triple-net leases generally obligate our tenants to pay all capital expenditures necessary to maintain and improve our triple-net leased properties. However, from time to time, we may fund the capital expenditures for our triple-net leased properties through loans or advances to the tenant, which may increase the amount of rent payable with respect to the properties in certain cases. We may also fund capital expenditures for which we may become responsible upon expiration of our triple-net leases or in the event that our tenants are unable or unwilling to meet their obligations under those leases or capital expenditures related to our senior living operations and office operations reportable business segments. We expect that these liquidity needs generally will be satisfied by a combination of the following: cash flows from operations, cash on hand, debt assumptions and financings (including secured financings), issuances of debt and equity securities, dispositions of assets (in whole or in part through joint venture arrangements with third parties) and borrowings under our revolving credit facilities.
To the extent that unanticipated capital expenditure needs arise or significant borrowings are required, our liquidity may be affected adversely. Our ability to borrow additional funds may be restricted in certain circumstances by the terms of the instruments governing our outstanding indebtedness.
We are party to certain agreements that obligate us to develop seniors housing or healthcare properties funded through capital that we and, in certain circumstances, our joint venture partners provide. As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
14
properties under development pursuant to these agreements, including
four
properties that are owned by unconsolidated real estate entities. In addition, from time to time, we engage in redevelopment projects with respect to our existing seniors housing communities to maximize the value, increase NOI, maintain a market-competitive position, achieve property stabilization or change the primary use of the property.
Equity Offerings and Related Events
In March 2015, we replaced our previous shelf registration statement that was scheduled to expire in accordance with the SEC’s rules with a new universal shelf registration statement, rendering our previous ATM program inaccessible. In connection with our new universal shelf registration statement, we established a new ATM program pursuant to which we may sell, from time to time, up to an aggregate of
$1.0 billion
of our common stock.
For the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we issued and sold
1.1 million
shares of common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$73.9 million
, after sales agent commissions. As of
December 31, 2017
, approximately
$155.6 million
of our common stock remained available for sale under our ATM equity offering program.
Other
We received proceeds of
$16.3 million
and
$20.4 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively, from the exercises of outstanding stock options. Future proceeds from the exercises of stock options will be affected primarily by the future trading price of our common stock and the number of options outstanding. The number of options outstanding increased to
5.0 million
as of
December 31, 2017
, from
3.8 million
as of
December 31, 2016
. The weighted average exercise price was
$58.57
as of
December 31, 2017
.
73
Cash Flows
The following table sets forth our sources and uses of cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
For the Years Ended
December 31,
Increase (Decrease)
to Cash
2017
2016
$
%
(Dollars in thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
$
286,707
$
53,023
$
233,684
nm
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,442,180
1,372,341
69,839
5.1
%
Net cash used in investing activities
(976,517
)
(1,234,643
)
258,126
20.9
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
(671,327
)
96,838
(768,165
)
nm
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
312
(852
)
1,164
nm
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
81,355
$
286,707
(205,352
)
(71.6)
nm—not meaningful
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Cash flows from operating activities increased
$69.8 million
during the year ended
December 31, 2017
over the same period in
2016
due primarily to investments made during
2016
and
2017
, partially offset by dispositions during the same periods.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Cash used in investing activities decreased
$258.1 million
during
2017
over
2016
primarily due to decreased investment in real estate property during
2017
and proceeds from the 2017 sale of
36
SNFs owned by us and operated by Kindred, partially offset by the $700.0 million term loan we provided in March 2017 to facilitate Ardent’s acquisition of LHP, increases in development project expenditures and investments in unconsolidated entities and decreased loan receivable payments received during
2017
.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Cash provided by financing activities decreased
$768.2 million
during
2017
over
2016
primarily due to increased debt repayments and decreased proceeds from the issuance of common stock during 2017, partially offset by increased senior note issuances and borrowings on our unsecured revolving credit facility during 2017 over 2016.
Contractual Obligations
The following table summarizes the effect that minimum debt (which includes principal and interest payments) and other material noncancelable commitments are expected to have on our cash flow in future periods as of
December 31, 2017
:
Total
Less than 1
year
(3)
1 - 3 years
(4)
3 - 5 years
(5)
More than 5
years
(6)
(In thousands)
Long-term debt obligations
(1) (2)
$
14,444,492
$
1,214,444
$
3,499,792
$
3,252,070
$
6,478,186
Operating obligations, including ground lease obligations
738,508
27,498
47,159
40,389
623,462
Total
$
15,183,000
$
1,241,942
$
3,546,951
$
3,292,459
$
7,101,648
(1)
Amounts represent contractual amounts due, including interest.
(2)
Interest on variable rate debt was based on forward rates obtained as of
December 31, 2017
.
(3)
Includes
$700.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 2.00% senior notes due 2018.
(4)
Includes
$600.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 4.00% senior notes due 2019,
$318.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.00% senior notes, series A due 2019,
$500.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 2.700% senior notes due 2020, and
$900.0 million
of borrowings under our unsecured term loan due 2020.
74
(5)
Includes
$535.8 million
of borrowings outstanding on our unsecured revolving credit facility,
$2.9 million
of borrowings outstanding on our secured revolving construction credit facility,
$700.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 4.750% senior notes due 2021,
$600.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 4.25% senior notes due 2022,
$500.0 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.250% senior notes due 2022 and
$198.8 million
outstanding principal amount of our 3.300% senior notes, Series C due 2022.
(6)
Includes
$4.4 billion
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our senior notes maturing between 2023 and 2045.
$52.4 million
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our 6.90% senior notes due 2037 are subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on October 1, 2027, and
$23.0 million
aggregate principal amount outstanding of our 6.59% senior notes due 2038 are subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$16.8 million
of unrecognized tax benefits that are excluded from the table above, as we are unable to make a reasonable reliable estimate of the period of cash settlement, if any, with the respective tax authority.
ITEM 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
The information set forth in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Asset/Liability Management” is incorporated by reference into this Item 7A.
75
ITEM 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Ventas, Inc.
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules
Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
77
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
78
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
79
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2017 and 2016
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedule
s
Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
142
Schedule III — Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
143
Schedule IV — Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
178
76
MANAGEMENT REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This system is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting is not intended to provide absolute assurance that a misstatement of our financial statements would be prevented or detected.
Management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria set forth in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on this assessment, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective at the reasonable assurance level as of
December 31, 2017
.
The effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2017
has been audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report included herein.
77
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the stockholders and board of directors
Ventas, Inc.:
Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Ventas, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three‑year period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes and financial statement schedules II, III and IV (collectively, the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the three‑year period ended December 31, 2017, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, and our report dated February 9, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Basis for Opinion
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/ KPMG LLP
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2014
.
Chicago, Illinois
February 9, 2018
78
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
To the stockholders and board of directors
Ventas, Inc.:
Opinion on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
We have audited Ventas, Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013)
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes and financial statement schedules II, III, and IV (collectively, the “consolidated financial statements”), and our report dated February 9, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
Basis for Opinion
The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management Report on the Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
79
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 9, 2018
80
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
As of December 31,
2017
2016
(In thousands, except per
share amounts)
Assets
Real estate investments:
Land and improvements
$
2,147,621
$
2,089,591
Buildings and improvements
22,177,088
21,516,396
Construction in progress
343,129
210,599
Acquired lease intangibles
1,537,995
1,510,629
26,205,833
25,327,215
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
(5,617,453
)
(4,932,461
)
Net real estate property
20,588,380
20,394,754
Secured loans receivable and investments, net
1,346,359
702,021
Investments in unconsolidated real estate entities
123,639
95,921
Net real estate investments
22,058,378
21,192,696
Cash and cash equivalents
81,355
286,707
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
106,898
80,647
Goodwill
1,034,641
1,033,225
Assets held for sale
100,324
54,961
Other assets
572,945
518,364
Total assets
$
23,954,541
$
23,166,600
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
11,276,062
$
11,127,326
Accrued interest
93,958
83,762
Accounts payable and other liabilities
1,182,552
907,928
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
61,202
1,462
Deferred income taxes
250,092
316,641
Total liabilities
12,863,866
12,437,119
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
158,490
200,728
Commitments and contingencies
Equity:
Ventas stockholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; 10,000 shares authorized, unissued
—
—
Common stock, $0.25 par value; 600,000 shares authorized, 356,187 and 354,125 shares issued at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively
89,029
88,514
Capital in excess of par value
13,053,057
12,917,002
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(35,120
)
(57,534
)
Retained earnings (deficit)
(2,240,698
)
(2,487,695
)
Treasury stock, 1 share at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively
(42
)
(47
)
Total Ventas stockholders’ equity
10,866,226
10,460,240
Noncontrolling interests
65,959
68,513
Total equity
10,932,185
10,528,753
Total liabilities and equity
$
23,954,541
$
23,166,600
See accompanying notes.
81
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands, except per share
amounts)
Revenues
Rental income:
Triple-net leased
$
840,131
$
845,834
$
779,801
Office
753,467
630,342
566,245
1,593,598
1,476,176
1,346,046
Resident fees and services
1,843,232
1,847,306
1,811,255
Office building and other services revenue
13,677
21,070
41,492
Income from loans and investments
117,608
98,094
86,553
Interest and other income
6,034
876
1,052
Total revenues
3,574,149
3,443,522
3,286,398
Expenses
Interest
448,196
419,740
367,114
Depreciation and amortization
887,948
898,924
894,057
Property-level operating expenses:
Senior living
1,250,065
1,242,978
1,209,415
Office
233,007
191,784
174,225
1,483,072
1,434,762
1,383,640
Office building services costs
3,391
7,311
26,565
General, administrative and professional fees
135,490
126,875
128,035
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
754
2,779
14,411
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
10,535
24,635
102,944
Other
20,052
9,988
17,957
Total expenses
2,989,438
2,925,014
2,934,723
Income before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interests
584,711
518,508
351,675
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(561
)
4,358
(1,420
)
Income tax benefit
59,799
31,343
39,284
Income from continuing operations
643,949
554,209
389,539
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
18,580
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1,356,470
$
649,231
$
417,843
Earnings per common share
Basic:
Income from continuing operations
$
1.81
$
1.61
$
1.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
3.82
1.88
1.26
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations
$
1.80
$
1.59
$
1.17
Net income attributable to common stockholders
3.78
1.86
1.25
Weighted average shares used in computing earnings per common share:
Basic
355,326
344,703
330,311
Diluted
358,566
348,390
334,007
See accompanying notes.
82
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Net income
$
1,361,112
$
651,490
$
419,222
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Foreign currency translation
20,612
(52,266
)
(14,792
)
Unrealized loss on government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(437
)
(310
)
(5,236
)
Other
2,239
2,607
(658
)
Total other comprehensive income (loss)
22,414
(49,969
)
(20,686
)
Comprehensive income
1,383,526
601,521
398,536
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
Comprehensive income attributable to common stockholders
$
1,378,884
$
599,262
$
397,157
See accompanying notes.
83
VENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
Common
Stock Par
Value
Capital in
Excess of
Par Value
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Retained
Earnings
(Deficit)
Treasury
Stock
Total Ventas
Stockholders’
Equity
Non- controlling
Interests
Total Equity
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Balance at January 1, 2015
$
74,656
$
10,119,306
$
13,121
$
(1,526,388
)
$
(511
)
$
8,680,184
$
74,213
$
8,754,397
Net income
—
—
—
417,843
—
417,843
1,379
419,222
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(20,686
)
—
—
(20,686
)
—
(20,686
)
Acquisition-related activity
7,103
2,209,202
—
—
—
2,216,305
853
2,217,158
Impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
(1,247,356
)
—
—
—
(1,247,356
)
(4,717
)
(1,252,073
)
Net change in noncontrolling interests
—
—
—
—
—
—
(12,530
)
(12,530
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$3.04 per share
—
—
—
(1,003,413
)
—
(1,003,413
)
—
(1,003,413
)
Issuance of common stock
1,797
489,227
—
—
—
491,024
—
491,024
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
23
6,068
—
—
5,945
12,036
—
12,036
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interests
—
(374
)
—
—
—
(374
)
1,902
1,528
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
7,831
—
—
—
7,831
—
7,831
Redemption of OP units
—
1,719
—
—
—
1,719
—
1,719
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
—
17,215
—
—
(8,001
)
9,214
—
9,214
Balance at December 31, 2015
83,579
11,602,838
(7,565
)
(2,111,958
)
(2,567
)
9,564,327
61,100
9,625,427
Net income
—
—
—
649,231
—
649,231
2,259
651,490
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(49,969
)
—
—
(49,969
)
—
(49,969
)
Impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
640
—
—
—
640
—
640
Net change in noncontrolling interests
—
(2,179
)
—
—
—
(2,179
)
19,008
16,829
Dividends to common stockholders—$2.965 per share
—
—
—
(1,024,968
)
—
(1,024,968
)
—
(1,024,968
)
Issuance of common stock
4,716
1,281,947
—
—
17
1,286,680
—
1,286,680
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
99
26,594
—
—
2,572
29,265
—
29,265
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interests
—
(1,714
)
—
—
—
(1,714
)
(13,854
)
(15,568
)
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
(21,085
)
—
—
—
(21,085
)
—
(21,085
)
Redemption of OP units
92
22,622
—
—
1,098
23,812
—
23,812
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
28
7,339
—
—
(1,167
)
6,200
—
6,200
Balance at December 31, 2016
88,514
12,917,002
(57,534
)
(2,487,695
)
(47
)
10,460,240
68,513
10,528,753
Net income
—
—
—
1,356,470
—
1,356,470
4,642
1,361,112
Other comprehensive income
—
—
22,414
—
—
22,414
—
22,414
Impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
107
—
—
—
107
—
107
Net change in noncontrolling interests
—
(1,427
)
—
—
—
(1,427
)
(13,292
)
(14,719
)
Dividends to common stockholders—$3.115 per share
—
—
—
(1,109,473
)
—
(1,109,473
)
—
(1,109,473
)
Issuance of common stock
276
72,618
—
—
553
73,447
—
73,447
Issuance of common stock for stock plans
87
21,723
—
—
796
22,606
—
22,606
Change in redeemable noncontrolling interests
—
(850
)
—
—
—
(850
)
6,096
5,246
Adjust redeemable OP unitholder interests to current fair value
—
253
—
—
—
253
—
253
Redemption of OP units
84
19,845
—
—
3,207
23,136
—
23,136
Grant of restricted stock, net of forfeitures
68
23,786
—
—
(4,551
)
19,303
—
19,303
Balance at December 31, 2017
$
89,029
$
13,053,057
$
(35,120
)
$
(2,240,698
)
$
(42
)
$
10,866,226
$
65,959
$
10,932,185
See accompanying notes.
84
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income
$
1,361,112
$
651,490
$
419,222
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization (including amounts in discontinued operations)
887,948
898,924
973,663
Amortization of deferred revenue and lease intangibles, net
(20,537
)
(20,336
)
(24,129
)
Other non-cash amortization
16,058
10,357
5,448
Stock-based compensation
26,543
20,958
19,537
Straight-lining of rental income, net
(23,134
)
(27,988
)
(33,792
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
754
2,779
14,411
Gain on real estate dispositions
(717,273
)
(98,203
)
(18,811
)
Gain on real estate loan investments
(124
)
(2,271
)
—
Gain on sale of marketable securities
—
—
(5,800
)
Income tax benefit
(63,599
)
(34,227
)
(42,384
)
Loss (income) from unconsolidated entities
3,588
(4,358
)
1,244
(Gain) loss on re-measurement of equity interests upon acquisition, net
(3,027
)
—
176
Distributions from unconsolidated entities
4,676
7,598
23,462
Other
9,240
(1,847
)
6,517
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
(Increase) decrease in other assets
(15,854
)
5,560
42,316
Increase in accrued interest
11,068
2,604
19,995
Decrease in accounts payable and other liabilities
(35,259
)
(38,699
)
(2,244
)
Net cash provided by operating activities
1,442,180
1,372,341
1,398,831
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(380,232
)
(1,429,112
)
(2,650,788
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
(748,119
)
(158,635
)
(171,144
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
537,431
300,561
492,408
Proceeds from loans receivable
101,097
320,082
109,176
Proceeds from sale or maturity of marketable securities
—
—
76,800
Funds held in escrow for future development expenditures
—
—
4,003
Development project expenditures
(299,085
)
(143,647
)
(119,674
)
Capital expenditures
(132,558
)
(117,456
)
(107,487
)
Distributions from unconsolidated entities
6,169
—
—
Investment in unconsolidated entities
(61,220
)
(6,436
)
(56,986
)
Net cash used in investing activities
(976,517
)
(1,234,643
)
(2,423,692
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facilities
384,783
(35,637
)
(723,457
)
Net cash impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
—
(128,749
)
Proceeds from debt
1,111,649
893,218
2,512,747
Proceeds from debt related to CCP Spin-Off
—
—
1,400,000
Repayment of debt
(1,369,084
)
(1,022,113
)
(1,435,596
)
Purchase of noncontrolling interests
(15,809
)
(2,846
)
(3,819
)
Payment of deferred financing costs
(27,297
)
(6,555
)
(24,665
)
Issuance of common stock, net
73,596
1,286,680
491,023
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(827,285
)
(1,024,968
)
(1,003,413
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
(5,677
)
(8,640
)
(15,095
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
—
—
(33,188
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interests
4,402
7,326
—
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
(11,187
)
(6,879
)
(12,649
)
Other
10,582
17,252
(81
)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
(671,327
)
96,838
1,023,058
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
(205,664
)
234,536
(1,803
)
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
312
(852
)
(522
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
286,707
53,023
55,348
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
81,355
$
286,707
$
53,023
85
V
ENTAS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Interest paid including swap payments and receipts
$
409,890
$
395,138
$
391,699
Supplemental schedule of non-cash activities:
Assets acquired and liabilities assumed from acquisitions:
Real estate investments
$
425,906
$
69,092
$
2,565,960
Utilization of funds held for an Internal Revenue Code Section 1031 exchange
(286,748
)
(6,954
)
(8,911
)
Other assets
(3,716
)
90,037
20,090
Debt
75,231
47,641
177,857
Other liabilities
70,878
72,636
54,459
Deferred income tax liability
(14,869
)
9,381
52,153
Noncontrolling interests
4,202
22,517
88,085
Equity issued
—
—
2,204,585
Non-cash impact of CCP Spin-Off
—
—
1,256,404
Equity issued for redemption of OP Units and Class C Units
24,002
24,318
—
See accompanying notes.
86
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1—DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
Ventas, Inc., an S&P 500 company, is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”)
with a highly diversified portfolio of seniors housing and healthcare properties located throughout the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. As of
December 31, 2017
, we owned more than
1,200
properties (including properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities and properties classified as held for sale), consisting of seniors housing communities, medical office buildings (“MOBs”), life science and innovation centers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”) and long-term acute care facilities (“LTACs”), health systems and skilled nursing facilities (“SNFs”), and we had
14
properties under development, including
four
properties that are owned by unconsolidated real estate entities.
Our company was originally founded in 1983 and is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
We primarily invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties through acquisitions and lease our properties to unaffiliated tenants or operate them through independent third-party managers. As of
December 31, 2017
, we leased a total of
546
properties (excluding MOBs) to various healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures.
As of
December 31, 2017
, pursuant to long-term management agreements, we engaged independent operators, such as Atria Senior Living, Inc. (“Atria”) and Sunrise Senior Living, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Sunrise”), to manage
297
seniors housing communities for us.
Our
three
largest tenants, Brookdale Senior Living, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Brookdale Senior Living”), Ardent Health Partners, LLC (together with its subsidiaries, “Ardent”) and Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Kindred”) leased from us
135
properties (excluding
one
property managed by Brookdale Senior Living pursuant to a long-term management agreement),
10
properties and
31
properties (excluding
one
MOB included within our office operations reportable business segment), respectively, as of
December 31, 2017
.
Through our Lillibridge Healthcare Services, Inc. subsidiary and our ownership interest in PMB Real Estate Services LLC, we also provide MOB management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services to highly rated hospitals and health systems throughout the United States. In addition, from time to time, we make secured and non-mortgage loans and other investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties.
In August 2015, we completed the spin-off of most of our post-acute/skilled nursing facility portfolio into an independent, publicly traded REIT named Care Capital Properties, Inc. (“CCP”) (the “CCP Spin-Off”). The historical results of operations of the CCP properties are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. See “
NOTE 5—DISPOSITIONS
.”
In September 2016, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the university affiliated life science and innovation real estate assets of Wexford Science & Technology, LLC (“Wexford”) from affiliates of Blackstone Real Estate Partners VIII, L.P. (together with its affiliates, “Blackstone”) (the “Life Sciences Acquisition”). As a result, we renamed our MOB operations reportable business segment “office operations,” which now includes both MOBs and life science and innovation centers.
NOTE 2—ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements
include our accounts and the accounts of our wholly owned subsidiaries and the joint venture entities over which we exercise control. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation, and our net earnings are reduced by the portion of net earnings attributable to noncontrolling interests.
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”)
requires us to identify entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights and to determine which business enterprise is the primary beneficiary of variable interest entities (“VIEs”). A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as
87
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; and (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. We consolidate our investment in a VIE when we determine that we are its primary beneficiary. We may change our original assessment of a VIE upon subsequent events such as the modification of contractual arrangements that affects the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposition of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.
We identify the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. We perform this analysis on an ongoing basis.
As it relates to investments in joint ventures, GAAP may preclude consolidation by the sole general partner in certain circumstances based on the type of rights held by the limited partner(s). We assess limited partners’ rights and their impact on our consolidation conclusions, and we reassess if there is a change to the terms or in the exercisability of the rights of the limited partners, the sole general partner increases or decreases its ownership of limited partnership interests, or there is an increase or decrease in the number of outstanding limited partnership interests. We also apply this guidance to managing member interests in limited liability companies.
We consolidate several VIEs that share the following common characteristics:
•
the VIE is in the legal form of an LP or LLC;
•
the VIE was designed to own and manage its underlying real estate investments;
•
we are the general partner or managing member of the VIE;
•
we own a majority of the voting interests in the VIE;
•
a minority of voting interests in the VIE are owned by external third parties, unrelated to us;
•
the minority owners do not have substantive kick-out or participating rights in the VIE; and
•
we are the primary beneficiary of the VIE.
We have separately identified certain special purpose entities that were established to allow investments in life science projects by tax credit investors (“TCIs”). We have determined that these special purpose entities are VIEs and that we are the primary beneficiary of the VIEs, and therefore we consolidate these special purpose entities. Our primary beneficiary determination is based upon several factors, including but not limited to the rights we have in directing the activities which most significantly impact the VIEs’ economic performance as well as certain guarantees which protect the TCIs from losses should a tax credit recapture event occur.
In general, the assets of the consolidated VIEs are available only for the settlement of the obligations of the respective entities. Unless otherwise required by the LP or LLC agreement, any mortgage loans of the consolidated VIEs are non-recourse to us. The table below summarizes the total assets and liabilities of our consolidated VIEs as reported on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
December 31, 2017
December 31, 2016
Total Assets
Total Liabilities
Total Assets
Total Liabilities
(In thousands)
NHP/PMB L.P.
$
605,150
$
199,958
$
639,763
$
199,674
Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P.
—
—
2,143,139
162,426
Other identified VIEs
1,983,124
349,961
1,882,336
354,034
Tax credit VIEs
988,598
221,908
981,752
234,109
Investments in Unconsolidated Entities
We report investments in unconsolidated entities over whose operating and financial policies we have the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method of accounting. Under this method of accounting, our share of the investee’s earnings or losses is included in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
We base the initial carrying value of investments in unconsolidated entities on the fair value of the assets at the time we acquired the joint venture interest. We estimate fair values for our equity method investments based on discounted cash flow
88
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
models that include all estimated cash inflows and outflows over a specified holding period and, where applicable, any estimated debt premiums or discounts. The capitalization rates, discount rates and credit spreads we use in these models are based upon assumptions that we believe to be within a reasonable range of current market rates for the respective investments.
We generally amortize any difference between our cost basis and the basis reflected at the joint venture level, if any, over the lives of the related assets and liabilities and include that amortization in our share of income or loss from unconsolidated entities. For earnings of equity method investments with pro rata distribution allocations, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on their respective stated ownership percentages. In other instances, net income or loss is allocated between the partners in the joint venture based on the hypothetical liquidation at book value method (the “HLBV method”). Under the HLBV method, net income or loss is allocated between the partners based on the difference between each partner’s claim on the net assets of the joint venture at the end and beginning of the period, after taking into account contributions and distributions. Each partner’s share of the net assets of the joint venture is calculated as the amount that the partner would receive if the joint venture were to liquidate all of its assets at net book value and distribute the resulting cash to creditors and partners in accordance with their respective priorities. Under this method, in any given period, we could record more or less income than the joint venture has generated, than actual cash distributions received or than the amount we may receive in the event of an actual liquidation.
Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
We own a majority interest in NHP/PMB L.P. (“NHP/PMB”), a limited partnership formed in 2008 to acquire properties from entities affiliated with Pacific Medical Buildings LLC. We consolidate NHP/PMB, as our wholly owned subsidiary is the general partner and the primary beneficiary of this VIE. As of
December 31, 2017
, third party investors owned
2.7 million
Class A limited partnership units in NHP/PMB (“OP Units”), which represented
27.2%
of the total units then outstanding, and we owned
7.2 million
Class B limited partnership units in NHP/PMB, representing the remaining
72.8%
. At any time following the first anniversary of the date of their issuance, the OP Units may be redeemed at the election of the holder for cash or, at our option,
0.9051
shares of our common stock per OP Unit, subject to further adjustment in certain circumstances. We are party by assumption to a registration rights agreement with the holders of the OP Units that requires us, subject to the terms and conditions and certain exceptions set forth therein, to file and maintain a registration statement relating to the issuance of shares of our common stock upon redemption of OP Units.
Prior to January 2017, we owned a majority interest in Ventas Realty Capital Healthcare Trust Operating Partnership, L.P. (“Ventas Realty OP”) and we consolidated this entity, as our wholly owned subsidiary is the general partner, and was the primary beneficiary of this VIE. In January 2017, third party investors redeemed the remaining
341,776
limited partnership units (“Class C Units”) outstanding for
341,776
shares of Ventas common stock, valued at
$20.9 million
. After giving effect to such redemptions, Ventas Realty OP is our wholly owned subsidiary.
As redemption rights are outside of our control, the redeemable OP Units and Class C Units (together, the “OP Unitholder Interests”) are classified outside of permanent equity on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We reflect the redeemable OP Unitholder Interests at the greater of cost or fair value. As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, the fair value of the redeemable OP Unitholder Interests was
$146.3 million
and $
177.2 million
, respectively. We recognize changes in fair value through capital in excess of par value, net of cash distributions paid and purchases by us of any OP Unitholder Interests. Our diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) includes the effect of any potential shares outstanding from redemption of the OP Unitholder Interests.
Certain noncontrolling interests of other consolidated joint ventures were also classified as redeemable at
December 31, 2017
and
2016
. Accordingly, we record the carrying amount of these noncontrolling interests at the greater of their initial carrying amount (increased or decreased for the noncontrolling interests’ share of net income or loss and distributions) or the redemption value. Our joint venture partners have certain redemption rights with respect to their noncontrolling interests in these joint ventures that are outside of our control, and the redeemable noncontrolling interests are classified outside of permanent equity on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize changes in the carrying value of redeemable noncontrolling interests through capital in excess of par value.
Noncontrolling Interests
Excluding the redeemable noncontrolling interests described above, we present the portion of any equity that we do not own in entities that we control (and thus consolidate) as noncontrolling interests and classify those interests as a component of consolidated equity, separate from total Ventas stockholders’ equity, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. For consolidated joint ventures with pro rata distribution allocations, net income or loss is allocated between the joint venture partners based on their respective stated ownership percentages. In other cases, net income or loss is allocated between the joint venture partners based on the HLBV method. We account for purchases or sales of equity interests that do not result in a change of control as equity transactions, through capital in excess of par value. In addition, we include net income attributable to the noncontrolling interests in net income in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
89
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Accounting for Historic and New Markets Tax Credits
For certain of our life science and innovation centers, we are party to certain contractual arrangements with TCIs that were established to enable the TCIs to receive benefits of historic tax credits (“HTCs”) and/or new market tax credits (“NMTCs”). As of
December 31, 2017
, we own
11
properties that had syndicated HTCs or NMTCs, or both, to TCIs.
In general, capital contributions are made by TCIs into special purpose entities that invest in entities that own the subject property and generate the tax credits. The TCIs receive substantially all of the tax credits and hold only a noncontrolling interest in the economic risk and benefits of the special purpose entities.
HTCs are delivered to the TCIs upon substantial completion of the project. NMTCs are allowed for up to
39%
of a qualified investment and are delivered to the TCIs after the investment has been funded and spent on a qualified business. HTCs are subject to
20%
recapture per year beginning one year after the completion of the historic rehabilitation of the subject property. NMTCs are subject to
100%
recapture until the end of the seventh year following the qualifying investment. We have provided the TCIs with certain guarantees which protect the TCIs from losses should a tax credit recapture event occur. The contractual arrangements with the TCIs include a put/call provision whereby we may be obligated or entitled to repurchase the ownership interest of the TCIs in the special purpose entities at the end of the tax credit recapture period. We anticipate that either the TCIs will exercise their put rights or we will exercise our call rights prior to the applicable tax credit recapture periods.
The portion of the TCI’s capital contribution that is attributed to the put is recorded at fair value at inception in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, and is accreted to the expected put price as interest expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income over the recapture period. The remaining balance of the TCI’s capital contribution is initially recorded in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets and will be relieved upon delivery of the tax credit to the TCI, as a reduction in the carrying value of the subject property, net of allocated expenses. Direct and incremental costs incurred in structuring the transaction are deferred and will be recognized as an increase in the cost basis of the subject property upon the recognition of the related tax credit as discussed above.
Accounting Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions regarding future events that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Accounting for Real Estate Acquisitions
On January 1, 2017, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2017-01,
Clarifying the Definition of a Business
(“ASU 2017-01”) which narrows the
Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (“FASB”)
definition of a business and provides a framework that gives entities a basis for making reasonable judgments about whether a transaction involves an asset or a business. ASU 2017-01 states that when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or group of similar identifiable assets, the acquired asset is not a business. If this initial test is not met, an acquired asset cannot be considered a business unless it includes an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create output. The primary differences between business combinations and asset acquisitions include recognition of goodwill at the acquisition date and expense recognition for transaction costs as incurred. We are applying ASU 2017-01 prospectively for acquisitions after January 1, 2017.
Regardless of whether an acquisition is considered a business combination or an asset acquisition, we record the cost of the businesses or assets acquired as tangible and intangible assets and liabilities based upon their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. Intangibles primarily include the value of in-place leases and acquired lease contracts.
We estimate the fair value of buildings acquired on an as-if-vacant basis or replacement cost basis and depreciate the building value over the estimated remaining life of the building, generally not to exceed
35
years
. We determine the fair value of other fixed assets, such as site improvements and furniture, fixtures and equipment, based upon the replacement cost and depreciate such value over the assets’ estimated remaining useful lives as determined at the applicable acquisition date. We determine the value of land either by considering the sales prices of similar properties in recent transactions or based on internal analyses of recently acquired and existing comparable properties within our portfolio. We generally determine the value of construction in progress based upon the replacement cost. However, for certain acquired properties that are part of a ground-up development, we determine fair value by using the same valuation approach as for all other properties and deducting the estimated cost to complete the development. During the remaining construction period, we capitalize project costs until the
90
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
development has reached substantial completion. Construction in progress, including capitalized interest, is not depreciated until the development has reached substantial completion.
The fair value of acquired lease-related intangibles, if any, reflects: (i) the estimated value of any above and/or below market leases, determined by discounting the difference between the estimated market rent and in-place lease rent; and (ii) the estimated value of in-place leases related to the cost to obtain tenants, including leasing commissions, and an estimated value of the absorption period to reflect the value of the rent and recovery costs foregone during a reasonable lease-up period as if the acquired space was vacant. We amortize any acquired lease-related intangibles to revenue or amortization expense over the remaining life of the associated lease plus any assumed bargain renewal periods. If a lease is terminated prior to its stated expiration or not renewed upon expiration, we recognize all unamortized amounts of lease-related intangibles associated with that lease in operations at that time.
We estimate the fair value of purchase option intangible assets and liabilities, if any, by discounting the difference between the applicable property’s acquisition date fair value and an estimate of its future option price. We do not amortize the resulting intangible asset or liability over the term of the lease, but rather adjust the recognized value of the asset or liability upon sale.
We estimate the fair value of tenant or other customer relationships acquired, if any, by considering the nature and extent of existing relationships with the tenant or customer, growth prospects for developing new business with the tenant or customer, the tenant’s credit quality, expectations of lease renewals with the tenant, and the potential for significant, additional future leasing arrangements with the tenant, and we amortize that value over the expected life of the associated arrangements or leases, including the remaining terms of the related leases and any expected renewal periods. We estimate the fair value of trade names and trademarks using a royalty rate methodology and amortize that value over the estimated useful life of the trade name or trademark.
In connection with an acquisition, we may assume rights and obligations under certain lease agreements pursuant to which we become the lessee of a given property. We generally assume the lease classification previously determined by the prior lessee absent a modification in the assumed lease agreement. We assess assumed operating leases, including ground leases, to determine whether the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us given current market conditions on the acquisition date. To the extent the lease terms are favorable or unfavorable to us relative to market conditions on the acquisition date, we recognize an intangible asset or liability at fair value and amortize that asset or liability to interest or rental expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income over the applicable lease term. We include all lease-related intangible assets and liabilities within acquired lease intangibles and accounts payable and other liabilities, respectively, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We determine the fair value of loans receivable acquired by discounting the estimated future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans with the same terms and length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings. We do not establish a valuation allowance at the acquisition date because the estimated future cash flows already reflect our judgment regarding their uncertainty. We recognize the difference between the acquisition date fair value and the total expected cash flows as interest income using an effective interest method over the life of the applicable loan. Subsequent to the acquisition date, we evaluate changes regarding the uncertainty of future cash flows and the need for a valuation allowance, as appropriate.
We estimate the fair value of noncontrolling interests assumed consistent with the manner in which we value all of the underlying assets and liabilities.
We calculate the fair value of long-term assumed debt by discounting the remaining contractual cash flows on each instrument at the current market rate for those borrowings, which we approximate based on the rate at which we would expect to incur a replacement instrument on the date of acquisition, and recognize any fair value adjustments related to long-term debt as effective yield adjustments over the remaining term of the instrument.
Impairment of Long-Lived and Intangible Assets
We periodically evaluate our long-lived assets, primarily consisting of investments in real estate, for impairment indicators. If indicators of impairment are present, we evaluate the carrying value of the related real estate investments in relation to the future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying operations. In performing this evaluation, we consider market conditions and our current intentions with respect to holding or disposing of the asset. We adjust the net book value of leased properties and other long-lived assets to fair value if the sum of the expected future undiscounted cash flows, including sales proceeds, is less than book value. We recognize an impairment loss at the time we make any such determination.
91
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
If impairment indicators arise with respect to intangible assets with finite useful lives, we evaluate impairment by comparing the carrying amount of the asset to the estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If estimated future undiscounted net cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, then we estimate the fair value of the asset and compare the estimated fair value to the intangible asset’s carrying value. We recognize any shortfall from carrying value as an impairment loss in the current period.
We evaluate our investments in unconsolidated entities for impairment at least annually, and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of our investment may exceed its fair value. If we determine that a decline in the fair value of our investment in an unconsolidated entity is other-than-temporary, and if such reduced fair value is below the carrying value, we record an impairment.
We test goodwill for impairment at least annually, and more frequently if indicators arise. We first assess qualitative factors, such as current macroeconomic conditions, state of the equity and capital markets and our overall financial and operating performance, to determine the likelihood that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If we determine it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we proceed with the two-step approach to evaluating impairment. First, we estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and compare it to the reporting unit’s carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds fair value, we proceed with the second step, which requires us to assign the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit as if it had been acquired in a business combination at the date of the impairment test. The excess fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to the assets and liabilities is the implied value of goodwill and is used to determine the amount of impairment. We recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying value of goodwill exceeds the implied value in the current period.
Estimates of fair value used in our evaluation of goodwill (if necessary based on our qualitative assessment), investments in real estate, investments in unconsolidated entities and intangible assets are based upon discounted future cash flow projections or other acceptable valuation techniques that are based, in turn, upon all available evidence including level three inputs, such as revenue and expense growth rates, estimates of future cash flows, capitalization rates, discount rates, general economic conditions and trends, or other available market data. Our ability to accurately predict future operating results and cash flows and to estimate and determine fair values impacts the timing and recognition of impairments. While we believe our assumptions are reasonable, changes in these assumptions may have a material impact on our financial results.
Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations
We sell properties from time to time for various reasons, including favorable market conditions or the exercise of purchase options by tenants. We classify certain long-lived assets as held for sale once the criteria, as defined by GAAP, has been met. Long-lived assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value minus cost to sell and are no longer depreciated. We report discontinued operations when the following criteria are met: (1) a component of an entity or group of components that has been disposed of or classified as held for sale and represents a strategic shift that has or will have a major effect on an entity’s operations and financial results; or (2) an acquired business that is classified as held for sale on the acquisition date. Assets relating to the CCP Spin-Off were reported as discontinued operations once the transaction was completed. The results of operations for assets meeting the definition of discontinued operations are reflected in our Consolidated Statements of Income as discontinued operations for all periods presented. We allocate estimated interest expense to discontinued operations based on property values and our weighted average interest rate or the property’s actual mortgage interest.
Loans Receivable
We record loans receivable, other than those acquired in connection with a business combination, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets (either in secured loans receivable and investments, net or other assets, in the case of non-mortgage loans receivable) at the unpaid principal balance, net of any deferred origination fees, purchase discounts or premiums and valuation allowances. We amortize net deferred origination fees, which are comprised of loan fees collected from the borrower net of certain direct costs, and purchase discounts or premiums over the contractual life of the loan using the effective interest method and immediately recognize in income any unamortized balances if the loan is repaid before its contractual maturity.
We regularly evaluate the collectibility of loans receivable based on factors such as corporate and facility-level financial and operational reports, compliance with financial covenants set forth in the applicable loan agreement, the financial strength of the borrower and any guarantor, the payment history of the borrower and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due under the terms of the applicable loan agreement, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be collected.
92
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Cash Equivalents
Cash equivalents consist of highly liquid investments with a maturity date of three months or less when purchased. These investments are stated at cost, which approximates fair value.
Escrow Deposits and Restricted Cash
Escrow deposits consist of amounts held by us or our lenders to provide for future real estate tax, insurance expenditures and tenant improvements related to our properties and operations. Restricted cash generally represents amounts paid to us for security deposits and other similar purposes.
Deferred Financing Costs
We amortize deferred financing costs, which are reported within senior notes payable and other debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, as a component of interest expense over the terms of the related borrowings using a method that approximates a level yield. Amortized costs of approximately
$18.9 million
,
$17.9 million
and
$18.7 million
were included in interest expense for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, respectively.
Marketable Debt and Equity Securities
We record marketable debt and equity securities as available-for-sale and classify them as a component of other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets (other than our interests in government-sponsored pooled loan investments, which are classified as secured loans receivable and investments, net on our Consolidated Balance Sheets). We record these securities at fair value and include unrealized gains and losses recorded in stockholders’ equity as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We report interest income, including discount or premium amortization, on marketable debt securities and gains or losses on securities sold, which are based on the specific identification method, in income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Derivative Instruments
We recognize all derivative instruments in other assets or accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value as of the reporting date. We recognize changes in the fair value of derivative instruments in other expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Income or accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, depending on the intended use of the derivative and our designation of the instrument.
We do not use our derivative financial instruments, including interest rate caps, interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts, for trading or speculative purposes. Our foreign currency forward contracts and certain of our interest rate swaps (including the interest rate swap contracts of unconsolidated joint ventures) are designated as effectively hedging the variability of expected cash flows related to their underlying securities and, therefore, also are recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, with changes in the fair value of these instruments recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize our proportionate share of the change in fair value of swap contracts of our unconsolidated joint ventures in accumulated other comprehensive income on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Certain of our other interest rate swaps and rate caps were not designated as having a hedging relationship with the underlying securities and therefore do not meet the criteria for hedge accounting under GAAP. Accordingly, these interest rate swaps are recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, and we recognize changes in the fair value of these instruments in current earnings (in other expenses) in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments
Fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement, and we determine fair value based on the assumptions that we expect market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within levels one and two of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within level three of the hierarchy).
Level one inputs utilize unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. Level two inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in level one that are directly or indirectly observable for the asset or liability. Level two inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets and other inputs for the asset or liability that are observable at commonly quoted intervals, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates and yield curves. Level three inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which typically are based on our own assumptions, because there is little, if any, related market activity. If the determination of the fair value
93
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the hierarchy, the level within which the entire fair value measurement falls is the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. If the volume and level of market activity for an asset or liability has decreased significantly relative to the normal market activity for such asset or liability (or similar assets or liabilities), then transactions or quoted prices may not accurately reflect fair value. In addition, if there is evidence that a transaction for an asset or liability is not orderly, little, if any, weight is placed on that transaction price as an indicator of fair value. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.
We use the following methods and assumptions in estimating the fair value of our financial instruments.
•
Cash and cash equivalents -
The carrying amount of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents reported on our Consolidated Balance Sheets approximates fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments.
•
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
- The carrying amount of escrow deposits and restricted cash reported on our Consolidated Balance Sheets approximates fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments.
•
Loans receivable -
We estimate the fair value of loans receivable using level two and level three inputs. We discount future cash flows using current interest rates at which similar loans with the same terms and length to maturity would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings.
•
Marketable debt securities -
We estimate the fair value of corporate bonds, if any, using level two inputs. We observe quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. We estimate the fair value of certain government-sponsored pooled loan investments using level three inputs. We consider credit spreads, underlying asset performance and credit quality, and default rates.
•
Derivative instruments -
With the assistance of a third party, we estimate the fair value of derivative instruments, including interest rate caps, interest rate swaps, and foreign currency forward contracts using level two inputs.
◦
Interest rate caps - We observe forward yield curves and other relevant information;
◦
Interest rate swaps - We observe alternative financing rates derived from market-based financing rates, forward yield curves and discount rates; and
◦
Foreign currency forward contracts - We estimate the future values of the two currency tranches using forward exchange rates that are based on traded forward points and calculate a present value of the net amount using a discount factor based on observable traded interest rates.
•
Senior notes payable and other debt -
We estimate the fair value of senior notes payable and other debt using level two inputs. We discount the future cash flows using current interest rates at which we could obtain similar borrowings. For mortgage debt, we may estimate fair value using level three inputs, similar to those used in determining fair value of loans receivable (above).
•
Redeemable OP unitholder interests -
We estimate the fair value of our redeemable OP Unitholder Interests using level one inputs. We base fair value on the closing price of our common stock, as OP Units (and previously Class C Units) may be redeemed at the election of the holder for cash or, at our option, shares of our common stock, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances.
Revenue Recognition
Triple-Net Leased Properties and Office Operations
Certain of our triple-net leases and most of our MOB and life science and innovation center (collectively, “office operations”) leases provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent. We recognize base rental revenues under these leases on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term when collectability is reasonably assured. Recognizing rental income on a straight-line basis generally results in recognized revenues during the first half of a lease term exceeding the cash amounts contractually due from our tenants, creating a straight-line rent receivable that is included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
At
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, this cumulative excess totaled
$267.6 million
(net of allowances of
$117.8 million
) and
$244.6 million
(net of allowances of
$109.8 million
), respectively (excluding properties classified as held for sale).
Certain of our leases provide for periodic increases in base rent only if certain revenue parameters or other substantive contingencies are met. We recognize the increased rental revenue under these leases as the related parameters or contingencies are met, rather than on a straight-line basis over the applicable lease term.
94
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Senior Living Operations
We recognize resident fees and services, other than move-in fees, monthly as services are provided. We recognize move-in fees on a straight-line basis over the average resident stay. Our lease agreements with residents generally have terms of
12
to
18
months and are cancelable by the resident upon
30
days’ notice.
Other
We recognize interest income from loans and investments, including discounts and premiums, using the effective interest method when collectibility is reasonably assured. We apply the effective interest method on a loan-by-loan basis and recognize discounts and premiums as yield adjustments over the related loan term. We recognize interest income on an impaired loan to the extent our estimate of the fair value of the collateral is sufficient to support the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest. When the balance of the loan, other receivables and all related accrued interest is equal to or less than our estimate of the fair value of the collateral, we recognize interest income on a cash basis. We provide a reserve against an impaired loan to the extent our total investment in the loan exceeds our estimate of the fair value of the loan collateral.
We recognize income from rent, lease termination fees, development services, management advisory services and all other income when all of the following criteria are met in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Staff Accounting Bulletin 104: (i) the applicable agreement has been fully executed and delivered; (ii) services have been rendered; (iii) the amount is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collectibility is reasonably assured.
Allowances
We assess the collectibility of our rent receivables, including straight-line rent receivables. We base our assessment of the collectibility of rent receivables (other than straight-line rent receivables) on several factors, including, among other things, payment history, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and current economic conditions. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to recover the full value of the receivable, we provide a reserve against the portion of the receivable that we estimate may not be recovered. We base our assessment of the collectibility of straight-line rent receivables on several factors, including, among other things, the financial strength of the tenant and any guarantors, the historical operations and operating trends of the property, the historical payment pattern of the tenant and the type of property. If our evaluation of these factors indicates it is probable that we will be unable to receive the rent payments due in the future, we provide a reserve against the recognized straight-line rent receivable asset for the portion, up to its full value, that we estimate may not be recovered. If we change our assumptions or estimates regarding the collectibility of future rent payments required by a lease, we may adjust our reserve to increase or reduce the rental revenue recognized in the period we make such change in our assumptions or estimates.
Stock-Based Compensation
We recognize share-based payments to employees and directors, including grants of stock options, included in general, administrative and professional fees in our Consolidated Statements of Income generally on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period based on the grant date fair value of the award.
Gain on Sale of Assets
We recognize sales of assets only upon the closing of the transaction with the purchaser. We record payments received from purchasers prior to closing as deposits and classify them as other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recognize gains (net of any taxes) on assets sold using the full accrual method upon closing if the collectibility of the sales price is reasonably assured, we are not obligated to perform any significant activities after the sale to earn the profit, we have received adequate initial investment from the purchaser and other profit recognition criteria have been satisfied. We may defer recognition of gains in whole or in part until: (i) the profit is determinable, meaning that the collectibility of the sales price is reasonably assured or the amount that will not be collectible can be estimated; and (ii) the earnings process is virtually complete, meaning that we are not obliged to perform any significant activities after the sale to earn the profit.
Federal Income Tax
We have elected to be treated as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. Accordingly, we generally are not subject to federal income tax on net income that we distribute to our stockholders, provided that we continue to qualify as a REIT. However, with respect to certain of our subsidiaries that have elected to be treated as taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS” or “TRS entities”), we record income tax expense or benefit, as those entities are subject to federal income tax similar to regular corporations. Certain foreign subsidiaries are subject to foreign income tax, although they did not elect to be treated as TRSs.
95
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
We account for deferred income taxes using the asset and liability method and recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in our financial statements or tax returns. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse. Any increase or decrease in the deferred tax liability that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about expected future tax consequences of events, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur. Deferred income taxes also reflect the impact of operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. A valuation allowance is provided if we believe it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. Any increase or decrease in the valuation allowance that results from a change in circumstances, and that causes us to change our judgment about the realizability of the related deferred tax asset, is included in the tax provision when such changes occur.
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We recognize interest and penalties, if applicable, related to uncertain tax positions as part of income tax benefit or expense.
Foreign Currency
Certain of our subsidiaries’ functional currencies are the local currencies of their respective foreign jurisdictions. We translate the results of operations of our foreign subsidiaries into U.S. dollars using average rates of exchange in effect during the period, and we translate balance sheet accounts using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. We record resulting currency translation adjustments in accumulated other comprehensive income, a component of stockholders’ equity, on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, and we record foreign currency transaction gains and losses in other expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Segment Reporting
As of
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, we operated through
three
reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. Under our triple-net leased properties segment, we invest in and own seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our office operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease and manage MOBs and life science and innovation centers throughout the United States. See “
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
.”
Operating Leases
We account for payments made pursuant to operating leases in our Consolidated Statements of Income based on actual rent paid, plus or minus a straight-line rent adjustment for leases that provide for periodic and determinable increases in base rent.
Recently Issued or Adopted Accounting Standards
On January 1, 2017, we adopted ASU 2016-09,
Compensation - Stock Compensation
(“ASU 2016-09”) which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions, including the accounting for forfeitures and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. Adoption of ASU 2016-09 did not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements
.
In 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09,
Revenue From Contracts With Customers
(“ASU 2014-09”, as codified in “ASC 606”), which outlines a comprehensive model for entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts with customers. ASC 606 states that “an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.” While ASC 606 specifically references contracts with customers, it also applied to other transactions such as the sale of real estate. ASC 606 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and we plan to adopt ASC 606 using the modified retrospective method.
We have evaluated all of our revenue streams to identify whether each revenue stream would be subject to the provisions of ASC 606 and any differences in the timing, measurement or presentation of revenue recognition. Based on a review of our various revenue streams, we believe the following items in our Consolidated Statements of Income are subject to
96
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
ASC 606: office building and other services revenue, certain elements of our resident fees and services and gains on the sale of real estate. Our office building and other services revenues are primarily generated by management contracts where we provide management, leasing, marketing, facility development and advisory services. Resident fees and services primarily include amounts related to resident leases (subject to ASC 840,
Leases
) but also includes revenues generated through point-of-sale transactions that are ancillary to the residents’ contractual rights to occupy living and common-area space at the communities. While these revenue streams are subject to the provisions of ASC 606, we believe that the pattern and timing of recognition of income will be consistent with the current accounting model.
As it relates to gains on sale of real estate, we will apply the provisions of ASC 610-20,
Gain or Loss From Derecognition of Non-financial Assets
(“ASC 610-20”)
,
an
d
we expect to recognize any gains when we transfer control of a property
and when it is probable that we will collect substantially all of the related consideration.
We will no longer apply existing sales criteria in ASC 360,
Property, Plant, and Equipment.
We will recognize on January 1, 2018, through a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings,
$31.2 million
of deferred gains relating to sales of real estate assets in 2015. Other than the cumulative effect adjustment relating to such deferred gains, the adoption of ASC 606 and ASC 610-20 will not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements. Our remaining implementation item includes finalizing revised disclosures in accordance with the new standard.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02,
Leases
(“ASU 2016-02”), which introduces a lessee model that brings most leases on the balance sheet and, among other changes, eliminates the requirement in current GAAP for an entity to use bright-line tests in determining lease classification. The FASB also issued an Exposure Draft on January 5, 2018 proposing to amend ASU 2016-02, which would provide lessors with a practical expedient, by class of underlying assets, to not separate non-lease components from the related lease components and, instead, to account for those components as a single lease component, if certain criteria are met. ASU 2016-02 and the related Exposure Draft are not effective for us until January 1, 2019, with early adoption permitted. We are continuing to evaluate this guidance and the impact to us, as both lessor and lessee, on our Consolidated Financial Statements. We expect to utilize the practical expedients proposed in the Exposure Draft as part of our adoption of ASU 2016-02.
In 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15,
Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments
(“ASU 2016-15”), which provides clarification regarding how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows and ASU 2016-18,
Restricted Cash
(“ASU 2016-18”), which requires an entity to show the changes in total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 and ASU 2016-18 are effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and will be applied by us using a retrospective transition method. Adoption of these standards is not expected to have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
In 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16,
Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory
(“ASU 2016-16”), which requires a company to recognize the tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset, other than inventory, when the transfer occurs. ASU 2016-16 is effective for us beginning January 1, 2018 and will be applied by us using a modified retrospective method. Adoption of this standard is not expected to have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
NOTE 3—CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK
As of
December 31, 2017
, Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred managed or operated approximately
22.3%
,
10.8%
,
7.5%
,
4.9%
and
1.1%
, respectively, of our consolidated real estate investments based on gross book value (excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
). Because Atria and Sunrise manage our properties in exchange for the receipt of a management fee from us, we are not directly exposed to the credit risk of our managers in the same manner or to the same extent as our triple-net tenants.
Based on gross book value, approximately
25.9%
and
35.1%
of our real estate investments were seniors housing communities included in the triple-net leased properties and senior living operations reportable business segments, respectively (excluding properties classified as held for sale and properties owned through investments in unconsolidated entities as of
December 31, 2017
). MOBs, life science and innovation centers, IRFs and LTACs, health systems, SNFs and secured loans receivable and investments collectively comprised the remaining
39.0%
. Our consolidated properties were located in
46
states, the District of Columbia,
seven
Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom as of
December 31, 2017
, with properties in
one
97
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
state (
California
) accounting for more than 10% of our total continuing revenues and net operating income (“NOI,” which is defined as total revenues, excluding interest and other income, less property-level operating expenses and office building services costs) for each of the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
.
Triple-Net Leased Properties
The following table reflects our concentration risk for the periods presented:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
Revenues
(1)
:
Brookdale Senior Living
(2)
4.7
%
4.8
%
5.3
%
Ardent
3.1
3.1
1.3
Kindred
(3)
4.6
5.4
5.7
NOI:
Brookdale Senior Living
(2)
8.0
%
8.3
%
9.3
%
Ardent
5.3
5.3
2.3
Kindred
(3)
7.9
9.2
9.9
(1)
Total revenues include office building and other services revenue, income from loans and investments and interest and other income.
(2)
Excludes
one
seniors housing community included in the senior living operations reportable business segment at
December 31, 2017
.
(3)
Excludes
one
MOB included in the office operations reportable business segment.
Each of our leases with Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred is a triple-net lease that obligates the tenant to pay all property-related expenses, including maintenance, utilities, repairs, taxes, insurance and capital expenditures, and to comply with the terms of the mortgage financing documents, if any, affecting the properties. In addition, each of our Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred leases has a corporate guaranty. Brookdale Senior Living has multiple leases with us and those leases contain cross-default provisions tied to each other, as well as lease renewals by lease agreement or by pool of assets.
The properties we lease to Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred accounted for a significant portion of our triple-net leased properties segment revenues and NOI for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
. If any of Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent or Kindred becomes unable or unwilling to satisfy its obligations to us or to renew its leases with us upon expiration of the terms thereof, our financial condition and results of operations could decline, and our ability to service our indebtedness and to make distributions to our stockholders could be impaired. We cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their respective obligations to us, and any failure, inability or unwillingness by Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity, our ability to service our indebtedness and other obligations and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders, as required for us to continue to qualify as a REIT (a “Material Adverse Effect”). We also cannot assure you that Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent and Kindred will elect to renew their respective leases with us upon expiration of the leases or that we will be able to reposition any non-renewed properties on a timely basis or on the same or better economic terms, if at all.
98
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table sets forth the future contracted minimum rentals, excluding contingent rent escalations, but including straight-line rent adjustments and reserves where applicable, for all of our consolidated triple-net and office building leases as of
December 31, 2017
(excluding properties classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
):
Brookdale Senior Living
Ardent
Kindred
Other
Total
(In thousands)
2018
$
162,346
$
113,361
$
126,087
$
966,445
$
1,368,239
2019
151,999
113,361
126,127
912,556
1,304,043
2020
35,192
113,361
126,169
860,246
1,134,968
2021
14,071
113,361
126,211
799,658
1,053,301
2022
3,339
113,361
126,254
699,060
942,014
Thereafter
7,498
1,435,906
247,566
3,580,776
5,271,746
Total
$
374,445
$
2,002,711
$
878,414
$
7,818,741
$
11,074,311
Senior Living Operations
As of
December 31, 2017
, Atria and Sunrise, collectively, provided comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to
273
of our
297
seniors housing communities, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements.
We rely on our managers’ personnel, expertise, technical resources and information systems, proprietary information, good faith and judgment to manage our senior living operations efficiently and effectively. We also rely on our managers to set appropriate resident fees and otherwise operate our seniors housing communities in compliance with the terms of our management agreements and all applicable laws and regulations. Although we have various rights as the property owner under our management agreements, including various rights to terminate and exercise remedies under the agreements as provided therein, Atria’s or Sunrise’s failure, inability or unwillingness to satisfy its respective obligations under those agreements, to efficiently and effectively manage our properties or to provide timely and accurate accounting information with respect thereto could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, significant changes in Atria’s or Sunrise’s senior management or equity ownership or any adverse developments in their businesses or financial condition could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Our
34%
ownership interest in Atria entitles us to certain rights and minority protections, as well as the right to appoint
two
of
six
members on the Atria Board of Directors.
Brookdale Senior Living, Kindred, Atria, Sunrise and Ardent Information
Each of Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred is subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC and is required to file with the SEC annual reports containing audited financial information and quarterly reports containing unaudited financial information. The information related to Brookdale Senior Living and Kindred contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from SEC filings made by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, as the case may be, or other publicly available information, or was provided to us by Brookdale Senior Living or Kindred, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy. We are providing this data for informational purposes only, and you are encouraged to obtain Brookdale Senior Living’s and Kindred’s publicly available filings, which can be found at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
Atria, Sunrise and Ardent are not currently subject to the reporting requirements of the SEC. The information related to Atria, Sunrise and Ardent contained or referred to in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been derived from publicly available information or was provided to us by Atria, Sunrise or Ardent, as the case may be, and we have not verified this information through an independent investigation or otherwise. We have no reason to believe that this information is inaccurate in any material respect, but we cannot assure you of its accuracy.
99
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 4—ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PROPERTY
The following summarizes our acquisition and development activities during
2017
,
2016
and
2015
. We acquire and invest in seniors housing and healthcare properties primarily to achieve an expected yield on our investment, to grow and diversify our portfolio and revenue base, and to reduce our dependence on any single tenant, operator or manager, geographic location, asset type, business model or revenue source.
2017 Acquisitions
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we acquired
15
triple-net leased properties (including
six
assets previously owned by an equity method investee),
four
properties reported within our office operations reportable business segment (
three
life science, research and medical assets and
one
MOB) and
three
seniors housing communities (reported within our senior living operations reportable business segment) for an aggregate purchase price of
$691.3 million
. Each of these acquisitions was accounted for as an asset acquisition.
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we completed the development of
one
triple-net leased property, representing
$6.9 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
2016 Acquisitions
Life Sciences Acquisition
In September 2016, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the university affiliated life science and innovation real estate assets of Wexford from Blackstone for total consideration of
$1.5 billion
. The properties acquired will continue to be managed by Wexford, which will remain a separate management company owned and operated by the existing Wexford management team. We have exclusive rights to fund and own future life science projects developed by Wexford.
Other 2016 Acquisitions
During the year ended December 31, 2016, we made other investments totaling approximately
$42.3 million
, including the acquisition of
one
triple-net leased property and
two
MOBs.
Completed Developments
During 2016, we completed the development of
three
triple-net leased properties (
two
of which were expansions of existing seniors housing assets), representing
$31.9 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of
December 31, 2016
.
100
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Estimated Fair Value
We accounted for our 2016 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC 805,
Business Combinations
(“ASC 805”). The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in our 2016 real estate acquisitions, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Office Operations
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
1,579
$
63,526
$
65,105
Buildings and improvements
12,558
1,311,676
1,324,234
Acquired lease intangibles
163
200,022
200,185
Other assets
—
99,777
99,777
Total assets acquired
14,300
1,675,001
1,689,301
Notes payable and other debt
—
47,641
47,641
Intangible liabilities
—
103,769
103,769
Other liabilities
380
64,792
65,172
Total liabilities assumed
380
216,202
216,582
Noncontrolling interest assumed
—
24,656
24,656
Net assets acquired
13,920
1,434,143
1,448,063
Cash acquired
—
19,119
19,119
Total cash used
$
13,920
$
1,415,024
$
1,428,944
For certain acquisitions, the determination of fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed has changed. We made certain adjustments during 2017 due primarily to reclassification adjustments for presentation and adjustments to our valuation assumptions. The changes to our valuation assumptions were based on more accurate information concerning the subject assets and liabilities. None of these changes had a material impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Aggregate Revenue and NOI
For the year ended
December 31, 2016
, aggregate revenue and NOI derived from our completed 2016 acquisitions during our period of ownership were
$55.7 million
and
$37.7 million
, respectively.
Transaction Costs
Prior to our adoption of ASU 2017-01, transaction costs are expensed as incurred and included in merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income. During 2016, we expensed as incurred
$19.1 million
related to our completed 2016 transactions.
2015 Acquisitions
HCT Acquisition
In January 2015, we acquired American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. (“HCT”) in a stock and cash transaction, which added
152
properties to our portfolio. At the effective time of the merger, each share of HCT common stock outstanding (other than shares held by us, HCT or our respective subsidiaries, which shares were canceled) was converted into the right to receive either
0.1688
shares of our common stock (with cash paid in lieu of fractional shares) or
$11.33
per share in cash, at the election of each HCT shareholder. Shares of HCT common stock for which a valid election was not made were converted into the stock consideration. We funded the transaction through the issuance of approximately
28.4 million
shares of our common stock and
1.1 million
limited partnership units that were redeemable for shares of our common stock and the payment of approximately
$11 million
in cash (excluding cash in lieu of fractional shares). In addition, we assumed approximately
$167
101
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
million
of mortgage debt and repaid approximately
$730 million
of debt, net of HCT cash on hand. In August 2015,
20
of the properties that we acquired in the HCT acquisition were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off.
Ardent Health Services Acquisition
On August 4, 2015, we completed our acquisition of Ardent Medical Services, Inc. and simultaneous separation and sale of the Ardent hospital operating company to a consortium composed of an entity controlled by Equity Group Investments, Ardent’s management team and us (collectively the “Ardent Transaction”). As of the acquisition date, we recorded the estimated fair value of our investment in owned hospital and other real estate of approximately
$1.3 billion
. At closing, we paid
$26.3 million
for our
9.9%
interest in Ardent which represents our estimate of the acquisition date fair value of this interest. Upon closing, we entered into a long-term triple-net master lease with Ardent to operate the
ten
hospital campuses and other real estate we acquired.
Other 2015 Acquisitions
In 2015, we made other investments totaling approximately
$612 million
, including the acquisition of
eleven
triple-net
leased properties;
nine
MOBs (including
eight
MOBs that we had previously accounted for as investments in unconsolidated entities; see “
NOTE 7—INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED ENTITIES
”) and
12
skilled nursing facilities (all of which were disposed of as part of the CCP Spin-Off).
Completed Developments
During 2015, we completed the development of
one
triple-net leased seniors housing community, representing
$9.3 million
of net real estate property on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2015.
Estimated Fair Value
We accounted for our 2015 acquisitions under the acquisition method in accordance with ASC 805. The following table summarizes the acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, which we determined using level two and level three inputs:
Triple-Net Leased Properties
Senior Living Operations
Office Operations
Total
(In thousands)
Land and improvements
$
190,566
$
70,713
$
173,307
$
434,586
Buildings and improvements
1,726,063
703,080
1,214,546
3,643,689
Acquired lease intangibles
169,362
83,867
184,540
437,769
Other assets
174,093
272,888
402,734
849,715
Total assets acquired
2,260,084
1,130,548
1,975,127
5,365,759
Notes payable and other debt
—
77,940
99,917
177,857
Other liabilities
45,924
45,408
46,565
137,897
Total liabilities assumed
45,924
123,348
146,482
315,754
Net assets acquired
$
2,214,160
$
1,007,200
$
1,828,645
5,050,005
Redeemable OP unitholder interests assumed
88,085
Cash acquired
59,584
Equity issued
2,216,355
Total cash used
$
2,685,981
Included in other assets above is
$746.9 million
of goodwill, which represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date. A substantial amount of this goodwill was due to an increase in our stock price between the announcement date and closing dates of the HCT acquisition. Goodwill has been allocated to our reportable business segments based on the respective fair value of the net assets acquired, as follows: triple-net leased properties -
$133.6 million
; senior living operations -
$219.1 million
; and office operations -
$394.2 million
.
102
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Aggregate Revenue and NOI
For the year ended December 31, 2015, aggregate revenue and NOI derived from our 2015 real estate acquisitions during our period of ownership were
$327.0 million
and
$201.9 million
, respectively, excluding revenue and NOI for any assets contributed in the CCP Spin-Off.
Transaction Costs
Prior to our adoption of ASU 2017-01, transaction costs are expensed as incurred and included in merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income. For the year ending December 31, 2015, we expensed as incurred
$99.0 million
of costs related to our completed 2015 transactions,
$4.1 million
of which is reported within discontinued operations. These transaction costs exclude any separation costs associated with the CCP Spin-Off (refer to “
NOTE 5—DISPOSITIONS
”).
NOTE 5—DISPOSITIONS
2017 Activity
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we sold
53
triple-net leased properties,
five
MOBs and certain vacant land parcels for aggregate consideration of
$870.8 million
, and we recognized a gain on the sale of these assets of
$717.3 million
, net of taxes.
SNF Dispositions
In November 2016, we entered into agreements with Kindred providing that Kindred will either acquire all
36
SNFs owned by us and operated by Kindred (the “Ventas SNFs”) for
$700 million
, in connection with Kindred’s previously announced plan to exit its SNF business; or, renew the current lease on all unpurchased Ventas SNFs not purchased by Kindred by
April 30, 2018
until 2025 at the current rent level plus annual escalations. On June 30, 2017, Kindred announced that it had signed definitive agreements to sell its entire SNF business to an affiliate of Blue Mountain Capital Management, LLC and that, as Kindred closes on the sale of its SNFs, Kindred will pay to us its allocable portion of the sale proceeds for a total of approximately
$700 million
aggregate purchase price for the Ventas SNFs, and we will convey the applicable Ventas SNFs to the ultimate buyer.
During 2017, we sold the
36
Ventas SNFs, included in the
53
triple-net properties described above, for aggregate consideration of approximately
$700 million
and recognized a gain on the sale of these assets of
$657.6 million
, net of taxes.
2016 Activity
During the year ended December 31, 2016, we sold
29
triple-net leased properties,
one
seniors housing community included in our senior living operations reportable business segment and
six
MOBs for aggregate consideration of
$300.8 million
. We recognized a gain on the sales of these assets of
$98.2 million
, net of taxes.
2015 Activity
During 2015, we sold
39
triple-net leased properties and
26
MOBs for aggregate consideration of
$541.0 million
, including lease termination fees of
$6.0 million
, included within triple-net leased rental income in our Consolidated Statements of Income. We recognized a gain on the sales of these assets of
$46.3 million
, net of taxes, of which
$27.4 million
is being deferred due to
one
secured loan of
$78.4 million
and
one
non-mortgage loan of
$20.0 million
, we made to the buyers in connection with the sales of certain assets.
103
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Assets Held for Sale
The table below summarizes our real estate assets classified as held for sale as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, including the amounts reported within other assets and accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
December 31, 2017
December 31, 2016
Number of Properties Held for Sale
Assets Held for Sale
Liabilities Held for Sale
Number of Properties Held for Sale
Assets Held for Sale
Liabilities Held for Sale
(Dollars in thousands)
Triple-net leased properties
—
$
—
$
—
—
$
—
$
—
Office operations
8
100,324
61,202
7
53,151
1,462
Senior living operations
(1)
—
—
—
—
1,810
—
Total
8
$
100,324
$
61,202
7
$
54,961
$
1,462
(1)
Includes
one
vacant land parcel classified as held for sale as
December 31, 2016
, which was sold during 2017.
Real Estate Impairment
We recognized impairments of
$37.5 million
,
$35.2 million
and
$42.2 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
respectively, which are recorded primarily as a component of depreciation and amortization and relate primarily to our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment. Our recorded impairments were primarily the result of a change in our intent to hold the impaired assets. In most cases, we recognized an impairment in the periods in which our change in intent was made.
CCP Spin-Off
On August 17, 2015, we completed the CCP Spin-Off. In connection with the CCP Spin-Off, we disposed of
355
triple-net leased skilled nursing facilities and other healthcare assets operated by private regional and local care providers. The CCP Spin-Off was effectuated through a distribution of the common shares of CCP to holders of our common stock as of the distribution record date, and qualified as a tax-free distribution to our stockholders. For every
four
shares of Ventas common stock held as of the distribution record date of August 10, 2015, Ventas stockholders received
one
CCP common share on August 17, 2015. On August 17, 2015, just prior to the effective time of the spin-off, CCP (as our then wholly owned subsidiary) received approximately
$1.4 billion
of proceeds from a recently completed term loan and revolving credit facility. CCP paid us a distribution of
$1.3 billion
from these proceeds. We used this distribution from CCP to pay down our existing debt of
$1.1 billion
and to pay for a portion of our quarterly installment of dividends to our stockholders of
$0.2 billion
.
The historical results of operations of the CCP properties as well as the related assets and liabilities have been presented as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income. Discontinued operations also include separation costs incurred to complete the CCP Spin-Off of
$42.3 million
for the year ended December 31, 2015. Separation costs for 2015 include
$3.5 million
of stock-based compensation expense representing the incremental fair value of previously vested stock-based compensation awards as of the spin date. In addition, the assets and liabilities of CCP are presented separately from assets and liabilities from continuing operations in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The accompanying consolidated statements of cash flows include within operating, investing and financing cash flows those activities which related to our period of ownership of the CCP properties.
104
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following is a summary of the assets and liabilities of CCP at the CCP Spin-Off date:
August 17, 2015
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
2,588,255
Cash and cash equivalents
1,749
Goodwill
135,446
Assets held for sale
7,610
Other assets
15,089
Total assets
2,748,149
Liabilities
Accounts payable and other liabilities
217,760
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
985
Total liabilities
218,745
Net assets
$
2,529,404
Summarized financial information for CCP discontinued operations for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
respectively is as follows:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Revenues
Rental income
$
—
$
—
$
196,848
Income from loans and investments
—
—
2,148
Interest and other income
—
—
63
—
—
199,059
Expenses
Interest
—
—
61,613
Depreciation and amortization
—
—
79,479
General, administrative and professional fees
—
—
9
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
110
922
46,402
Other
—
—
1,332
110
922
188,835
Net (loss) income from discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
10,224
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
120
Net (loss) income from discontinued operations attributable to common stockholders
$
(110
)
$
(922
)
$
10,104
Capital and development project expenditures relating to CCP for the year ended December 31, 2015 were
$21.8 million
. Other than capital and development project expenditures there were no other significant non-cash operating or investing activities relating to CCP.
We and CCP entered into a transition services agreement prior to the CCP Spin-Off pursuant to which we and our subsidiaries provided to CCP, on an interim, transitional basis, various services. The services provided include information technology, accounting and tax services. The overall fee charged by us for such services (the "Service Fee") was
$2.5 million
for one year. We recognized income of
$1.6 million
and
$0.9 million
, for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, relating to the Service Fee, which was payable in four quarterly installments. The transition services agreement terminated on
August 31, 2016
.
105
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 6—LOANS RECEIVABLE AND INVESTMENTS
As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, we had
$1.4 billion
and
$754.6 million
, respectively, of net loans receivable and investments relating to seniors housing and healthcare operators or properties. The following is a summary of our loans receivable and investments, net as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, including amortized cost, fair value and unrealized gains or losses on available-for-sale investments:
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain
(In thousands)
As of December 31, 2017:
Secured/mortgage loans and other
$
1,291,694
$
1,291,694
$
1,286,322
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(1)
54,665
53,863
54,665
802
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
1,346,359
1,345,557
1,340,987
802
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
59,857
59,857
58,849
—
Total investments reported as Other assets
59,857
59,857
58,849
—
Total loans receivable and investments, net
$
1,406,216
$
1,405,414
$
1,399,836
$
802
Carrying Amount
Amortized Cost
Fair Value
Unrealized Gain
(In thousands)
As of December 31, 2016:
Secured/mortgage loans and other
$
646,972
$
646,972
$
655,981
$
—
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(1)
55,049
53,810
55,049
1,239
Total investments reported as Secured loans receivable and investments, net
702,021
700,782
711,030
1,239
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
52,544
52,544
53,626
—
Total investments reported as Other assets
52,544
52,544
53,626
—
Total loans receivable and investments, net
$
754,565
$
753,326
$
764,656
$
1,239
(1)
Investments in government-sponsored pooled loans have contractual maturity dates in 2023.
2017
Activity
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$37.6 million
for the partial prepayment and
$35.5 million
for the full repayment of loans receivable, which resulted in total gains of
$0.6 million
.
In March 2017, we provided secured debt financing to a subsidiary of Ardent to facilitate Ardent’s acquisition of LHP Hospital Group, Inc., which included a
$700.0 million
term loan and a
$60.0 million
revolving line of credit feature (of which
$28.0 million
was outstanding at
December 31, 2017
). The LIBOR-based debt financing has a five-year term, a
one
-year lock out feature and a weighted average interest rate of approximately
9.3%
as of
December 31, 2017
and is guaranteed by Ardent’s parent company.
2016
Activity
During the year ended
December 31, 2016
, we received aggregate proceeds of
$309.0 million
in final repayment of
three
secured loans receivable and partial repayment of
one
secured loan receivable and recognized gains of
$9.6 million
on the repayment of these loans receivable that are recorded in income from loans and investments in our Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended
December 31, 2016
.
106
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In February 2016, we made a
$140.0 million
secured mezzanine loan investment, at par, relating to Class A life sciences properties in California and Massachusetts, that has an annual interest rate of
9.95%
and matures in
2021
.
In September 2016, we acquired
three
non-mortgage loans receivable in connection with the Life Sciences Acquisition.
NOTE 7—INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED ENTITIES
We report investments in unconsolidated entities over whose operating and financial policies we have the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method of accounting. We are not required to consolidate these entities because our joint venture partners have significant participating rights, nor are these entities considered VIEs, as they are controlled by equity holders with sufficient capital. At
December 31, 2017
, we had
25%
ownership interests in joint ventures that owned
31
properties, excluding properties under development. We account for our interests in real estate joint ventures, as well as our
34%
interest in Atria and
9.9%
interest in Ardent, which are included within other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets, under the equity method of accounting.
With the exception of our interests in Atria and Ardent, we provide various services to each unconsolidated entity in exchange for fees and reimbursements. Total management fees earned in connection with these entities were
$6.3 million
,
$6.7 million
and
$7.8 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, respectively (which is included in office building and other services revenue in our Consolidated Statements of Income).
In October 2015, we acquired the
95%
controlling interests in
eight
MOBs from a joint venture entity in which we had a
5%
interest and that we accounted for as an equity method investment. In connection with this acquisition, we re-measured the fair value of our previously held equity interest and recognized a loss on re-measurement of
$0.2 million
, which is included in income from unconsolidated entities in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
In February 2017, we acquired the controlling interests in
six
triple-net leased seniors housing communities for a purchase price of
$100.0 million
. In connection with this acquisition, we re-measured the fair value of our previously held equity interest, resulting in a gain on re-measurement of
$3.0 million
, which is included in loss from unconsolidated entities in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
Since the above acquisitions, operations relating to these properties have been consolidated in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
107
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 8—INTANGIBLES
The following is a summary of our intangibles as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
December 31, 2017
December 31, 2016
Balance
Remaining
Weighted Average
Amortization
Period in Years
Balance
Remaining
Weighted Average
Amortization
Period in Years
(Dollars in thousands)
Intangible assets:
Above market lease intangibles
$
184,775
7.0
$
184,993
6.9
In-place and other lease intangibles
1,353,220
23.6
1,325,636
23.6
Goodwill
1,034,641
N/A
1,033,225
N/A
Other intangibles
35,890
12.3
35,783
11.3
Accumulated amortization
(861,452
)
N/A
(769,558
)
N/A
Net intangible assets
$
1,747,074
21.7
$
1,810,079
21.5
Intangible liabilities:
Below market lease intangibles
$
359,099
13.7
$
345,103
14.1
Other lease intangibles
40,141
40.8
40,843
38.5
Accumulated amortization
(160,965
)
N/A
(133,468
)
N/A
Purchase option intangibles
3,568
N/A
3,568
N/A
Net intangible liabilities
$
241,843
15.6
$
256,046
15.9
N/A—Not Applicable
Above market lease intangibles and in-place and other lease intangibles are included in acquired lease intangibles within real estate investments on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Other intangibles (including non-compete agreements, trade names and trademarks) are included in other assets on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Below market lease intangibles, other lease intangibles and purchase option intangibles are included in accounts payable and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. For the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, our net amortization related to these intangibles was
$67.2 million
,
$104.5 million
and
$142.7 million
, respectively. The estimated net amortization related to these intangibles for each of the next five years is as follows:
Estimated Net Amortization
(In thousands)
2018
$
55,591
2019
46,137
2020
40,085
2021
37,180
2022
30,580
The table below reflects the carrying amount of goodwill, by segment, as of
December 31, 2017
:
Goodwill
(In thousands)
Triple-net Leased Properties
$
305,261
Senior Living Operations
259,482
Office Operations
469,898
Total Goodwill
$
1,034,641
The
$1.4 million
increase in goodwill during the year ended
December 31, 2017
is entirely the result of foreign currency translation in our triple-net leased properties reportable business segment.
108
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 9—OTHER ASSETS
The following is a summary of our other assets as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Straight-line rent receivables, net
$
267,579
$
244,580
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
59,857
52,544
Other intangibles, net
6,496
8,190
Investment in unconsolidated operating entities
49,738
28,431
Other
189,275
184,619
Total other assets
$
572,945
$
518,364
109
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 10—SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND OTHER DEBT
The following is a summary of our senior notes payable and other debt as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Unsecured revolving credit facility
(1)
$
535,832
$
146,538
Secured revolving construction credit facility due 2022
2,868
—
1.250% Senior Notes due 2017
—
300,000
2.00% Senior Notes due 2018
700,000
700,000
Unsecured term loan due 2018
(2)
—
200,000
Unsecured term loan due 2019
(2)
—
371,215
4.00% Senior Notes due 2019
600,000
600,000
3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019
(3)
318,041
297,841
2.700% Senior Notes due 2020
500,000
500,000
Unsecured term loan due 2020
900,000
900,000
4.750% Senior Notes due 2021
700,000
700,000
4.25% Senior Notes due 2022
600,000
600,000
3.25% Senior Notes due 2022
500,000
500,000
3.300% Senior Notes, Series C due 2022
(3)
198,776
186,150
3.125% Senior Notes due 2023
400,000
400,000
3.100% Senior Notes due 2023
400,000
—
2.55% Senior Notes, Series D due 2023
(3)
218,653
—
3.750% Senior Notes due 2024
400,000
400,000
4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024
(3)
198,776
186,150
3.500% Senior Notes due 2025
600,000
600,000
4.125% Senior Notes due 2026
500,000
500,000
3.25% Senior Notes due 2026
450,000
450,000
3.850% Senior Notes due 2027
400,000
—
6.90% Senior Notes due 2037
52,400
52,400
6.59% Senior Notes due 2038
22,973
22,973
5.45% Senior Notes due 2043
258,750
258,750
5.70% Senior Notes due 2043
300,000
300,000
4.375% Senior Notes due 2045
300,000
300,000
Mortgage loans and other
1,308,564
1,718,897
Total
11,365,633
11,190,914
Deferred financing costs, net
(73,093
)
(61,304
)
Unamortized fair value adjustment
12,139
25,224
Unamortized discounts
(28,617
)
(27,508
)
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
11,276,062
$
11,127,326
(1)
As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively,
$28.7 million
and
$146.5 million
of aggregate borrowings were denominated in Canadian dollars. Aggregate borrowings of
$31.1 million
were denominated in British pounds as of
December 31, 2017
. There were
no
aggregate borrowings denominated in British pounds as of
December 31, 2016
.
(2)
As of
December 31, 2016
, there was
$571.2 million
of unsecured term loan borrowings under our unsecured credit facility, of which
$92.6 million
was in the form of Canadian dollars. In August 2017, we repaid the balances then outstanding on the term loans.
(3)
These borrowings are in the form of Canadian dollars.
110
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Credit Facilities and Unsecured Term Loans
In April 2017, we entered into an unsecured credit facility comprised of a
$3.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility, priced at LIBOR plus
0.875%
, that replaced our previous
$2.0 billion
unsecured revolving credit facility priced at LIBOR plus
1.0%
. The new unsecured credit facility was also comprised of our
$200.0 million
term loan that was scheduled to mature in 2018 and our
$278.6 million
term loan that was scheduled to mature in 2019. The 2018 and 2019 term loans were priced at LIBOR plus
1.05%
. In August 2017, we used most of the proceeds from the sale of
22
SNFs to repay the balances then outstanding on the 2018 and 2019 term loans, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$0.5 million
. See "
NOTE 5—DISPOSITIONS
”.
The unsecured revolving credit facility matures in 2021, but may be extended at our option subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions for
two
additional periods of
six
months each. The unsecured revolving credit facility also includes an accordion feature that permits us to increase our aggregate borrowing capacity thereunder to up to
$3.75 billion
.
Our unsecured credit facility imposes certain customary restrictions on us, including restrictions pertaining to: (i) liens; (ii) investments; (iii) the incurrence of additional indebtedness; (iv) mergers and dissolutions; (v) certain dividend, distribution and other payments; (vi) permitted businesses; (vii) transactions with affiliates; (viii) agreements limiting certain liens; and (ix) the maintenance of certain consolidated total leverage, secured debt leverage, unsecured debt leverage and fixed charge coverage ratios and minimum consolidated adjusted net worth, and contains customary events of default.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$535.8 million
of borrowings outstanding,
$14.5 million
of letters of credit outstanding and
$2.4 billion
of unused borrowing capacity available under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we also had a
$900.0 million
term loan due 2020 priced at LIBOR plus
0.975%
.
In September 2017, we entered into a new
$400.0 million
secured revolving construction credit facility which matures in 2022 and will be primarily used to finance life science and innovation center and other construction projects. As of
December 31, 2017
, there were
$2.9 million
of borrowings outstanding under the secured revolving construction credit facility.
Senior Notes
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had outstanding
$7.6 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership (“Ventas Realty”) (
$3.9 billion
of which was co-issued by Ventas Realty’s wholly owned subsidiary, Ventas Capital Corporation), approximately
$75.4 million
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. (“NHP”) and assumed by our subsidiary, Nationwide Health Properties, LLC (“NHP LLC”), as successor to NHP, in connection with our acquisition of NHP, and
C$1.2 billion
aggregate principal amount of senior notes issued by our subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited. All of the senior notes issued by Ventas Realty and Ventas Canada Finance Limited are unconditionally guaranteed by Ventas, Inc.
In May 2016, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.125%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.343%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.4 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In June 2016, we redeemed
$455.5 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.55%
senior notes due September 2016 at a public offering price of
100.335%
of par, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$2.1 million
. The redemption was funded using proceeds from our May 2016 senior note issuance, cash on hand and borrowings under our unsecured revolving credit facility. In July 2016, we repaid the remaining balance then outstanding of our
1.55%
senior notes due September 2016 of
$94.5 million
and recognized a loss on extinguishment of debt of
$0.3 million
.
In September 2016, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$450.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.25%
senior notes due 2026 at a public offering price equal to
99.811%
of par, for total proceeds of
$449.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
In March 2017, Ventas Realty issued and sold
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.100%
senior notes due 2023 at a public offering price equal to
99.280%
of par, for total proceeds of
$397.1 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses, and
$400.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
3.850%
senior notes due 2027 at a public offering price equal to
99.196%
of par, for total proceeds of
$396.8 million
before the underwriting discount and expenses.
111
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In April 2017, we repaid in full, at par,
$300.0 million
aggregate principal amount then outstanding of our
1.250%
senior notes due 2017 upon maturity.
In June 2017, Ventas Canada Finance Limited issued and sold
C$275.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
2.55%
senior notes, Series D due 2023 at a price equal to
99.954%
of par, for total proceeds of
C$274.9 million
before the agent fees and expenses. The notes were offered on a private placement basis in Canada. We used part of the proceeds to repay
C$124.4 million
on our unsecured term loan due 2019.
Ventas Realty’s senior notes are part of our and Ventas Realty’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of our and Ventas Realty’s existing and future senior obligations and ranking senior in right of payment to all of our and Ventas Realty’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, Ventas Realty’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to our and Ventas Realty’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. Ventas Realty’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of our subsidiaries (other than Ventas Realty and, with respect to those senior notes co-issued by Ventas Capital Corporation, Ventas Capital Corporation).
Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are part of our and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to our and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of our subsidiaries (other than Ventas Canada Finance Limited).
NHP LLC’s senior notes are part of NHP LLC’s general unsecured obligations, ranking equal in right of payment with all of NHP LLC’s existing and future senior obligations and ranking senior to all of NHP LLC’s existing and future subordinated indebtedness. However, NHP LLC’s senior notes are effectively subordinated to NHP LLC’s secured indebtedness, if any, to the extent of the value of the assets securing that indebtedness. NHP LLC’s senior notes are also structurally subordinated to the preferred equity and indebtedness, whether secured or unsecured, of its subsidiaries.
Ventas Realty, Ventas Canada Finance Limited and NHP LLC may redeem each series of their respective senior notes (other than NHP LLC’s
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 and
6.59%
senior notes due 2038), in whole at any time or in part from time to time, prior to maturity at the redemption prices set forth in the applicable indenture (which include, in many instances, a make-whole premium), plus, in each case, accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the redemption date.
NHP LLC’s
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 are subject to repurchase at the option of the holders, at par, on October 1, 2027, and its
6.59%
senior notes due 2038 are subject to repurchase at the option of the holders, at par, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
Mortgages
At
December 31, 2017
, we had
88
mortgage loans outstanding in the aggregate principal amount of
$1.3 billion
and secured by
88
of our properties. Of these loans,
77
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$1.0 billion
bear interest at fixed rates ranging from
3.0%
to
8.6%
per annum, and
11
loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$298.0 million
bear interest at variable rates ranging from
1.1%
to
4.6%
per annum as of
December 31, 2017
. At
December 31, 2017
, the weighted average annual rate on our fixed rate mortgage loans was
5.2%
, and the weighted average annual rate on our variable rate mortgage loans was
2.9%
. Our mortgage loans had a weighted average maturity of
5.5
years as of
December 31, 2017
.
During the years ended
December 31, 2017
, 2016 and 2015, we repaid in full mortgage loans in the aggregate principal amount of
$411.4 million
,
$337.8 million
and
$461.9 million
, respectively.
112
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Scheduled Maturities of Borrowing Arrangements and Other Provisions
As of
December 31, 2017
, our indebtedness had the following maturities:
Principal Amount
Due at Maturity
Unsecured Revolving
Credit
Facility
(1)
Scheduled Periodic
Amortization
Total Maturities
(In thousands)
2018
$
785,871
$
—
$
21,576
$
807,447
2019
1,330,572
—
15,759
1,346,331
2020
1,451,587
—
12,910
1,464,497
2021
772,838
535,832
11,505
1,320,175
2022
1,419,392
—
9,878
1,429,270
Thereafter
(2)
4,910,954
—
86,959
4,997,913
Total maturities
$
10,671,214
$
535,832
$
158,587
$
11,365,633
(1)
At
December 31, 2017
, we had
$81.4 million
of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, for
$454.5 million
of net borrowings outstanding under our unsecured revolving credit facility.
(2)
Includes
$52.4 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.90%
senior notes due 2037 that is subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on October 1, 2027, and
$23.0 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.59%
senior notes due 2038 that is subject to repurchase, at the option of the holders, on July 7 in each of 2018, 2023 and 2028.
The instruments governing our outstanding indebtedness contain covenants that limit our ability and the ability of certain of our subsidiaries to, among other things: (i) incur debt; (ii) make certain dividends, distributions and investments; (iii) enter into certain transactions; and/or (iv) merge, consolidate or sell certain assets. Ventas Realty’s and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes also require us and our subsidiaries to maintain total unencumbered assets of at least
150%
of our unsecured debt. Our credit facilities also require us to maintain certain financial covenants pertaining to, among other things, our consolidated total leverage, secured debt, unsecured debt, fixed charge coverage and net worth.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we were in compliance with all of these covenants.
Derivatives and Hedging
In the normal course of our business, interest rate fluctuations affect future cash flows under our variable rate debt obligations, loans receivable and marketable debt securities and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations affect our operating results. We follow established risk management policies and procedures, including the use of derivative instruments, to mitigate the impact of these risks.
For interest rate exposures, we use derivatives primarily to fix the rate on our variable rate debt and to manage our borrowing costs. We do not use derivative instruments for trading or speculative purposes, and we have a policy of entering into contracts only with major financial institutions based upon their credit ratings and other factors. When considered together with the underlying exposure that the derivative is designed to hedge, we do not expect that the use of derivatives in this manner would have any material adverse effect on our future financial condition or results of operations.
As of
December 31, 2017
, our variable rate debt obligations of
$1.9 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$549.9 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from March 2018 to January 2023 that effectively convert fixed rate debt to variable rate debt. As of
December 31, 2017
, our fixed rate debt obligations of
$9.4 billion
reflect, in part, the effect of
$250.9 million
notional amount of interest rate swaps with maturities ranging from October 2018 to September 2027, in each case that effectively convert variable rate debt to fixed rate debt.
In February 2016, we entered into a
$200 million
notional amount interest rate swap with a maturity of August 3, 2020 that effectively converts LIBOR-based floating rate debt to fixed rate debt, setting LIBOR at
1.132%
through the maturity date of the swap.
In July 2016, we entered into
$225 million
notional forward starting swaps that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates between July and the September issuance of
3.25%
senior notes due 2026. On the issuance date, we realized a gain of
$1.9 million
from these swaps that is being recognized over the life of the notes using an effective interest method.
113
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In January and February 2017, we entered into a total of
$275 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of April 3, 2017 that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.33%
. In March 2017, these swaps were terminated in conjunction with the issuance of the
3.850%
senior notes due 2027, which resulted in a
$0.8 million
gain that is being recognized over the life of the notes using the effective interest method.
In March 2017, we entered into interest rate swaps totaling a notional amount of
$400 million
with a maturity of January 15, 2023, effectively converting fixed rate debt to three month LIBOR-based floating rate debt. As a result, we will receive a fixed rate on the swap of
3.10%
and will pay a floating rate equal to three month LIBOR plus a weighted average swap spread of
0.98%
.
In June 2017, we entered into a total of
$125 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of January 15, 2018 and a maturity of January 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.1832%
.
In December 2017, we entered into a total of
$75 million
of notional forward starting swaps with an effective date of February 15, 2018 and a maturity of February 15, 2028, that reduced our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates related to changes in rates between the trade dates of the swaps and the forecasted issuance of long-term debt. The rate on the notional amounts was locked at a weighted average rate of
2.3705%
.
Unamortized Fair Value Adjustment
As of
December 31, 2017
, the unamortized fair value adjustment related to the long-term debt we assumed in connection with various acquisitions was
$12.1 million
and will be recognized as effective yield adjustments over the remaining terms of the instruments. The estimated aggregate amortization of the fair value adjustment related to long-term debt, which is reflected as a reduction of interest expense, was
$5.8 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2017
. For each of the next five years the estimated aggregate amortization of the fair value adjustment will be as follows:
Estimated Aggregate Amortization
(In thousands)
2018
$
2,821
2019
2,105
2020
1,664
2021
1,058
2022
646
114
NOTE 11—FAIR VALUES OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
As of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, the carrying amounts and fair values of our financial instruments were as follows:
2017
2016
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
Carrying
Amount
Fair Value
(In thousands)
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
$
81,355
$
81,355
$
286,707
$
286,707
Secured mortgage loans and other, net
1,291,694
1,286,322
646,972
655,981
Non-mortgage loans receivable, net
59,857
58,849
52,544
53,626
Government-sponsored pooled loan investments
54,665
54,665
55,049
55,049
Derivative instruments
7,248
7,248
3,302
3,302
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt, gross
11,365,633
11,600,750
11,190,914
11,369,440
Derivative instruments
5,435
5,435
2,316
2,316
Redeemable OP Unitholder Interests
146,252
146,252
177,177
177,177
For a discussion of the assumptions considered, refer to “
NOTE 2—ACCOUNTING POLICIES
.” The use of different market assumptions and estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the reported estimated fair value amounts. Accordingly, the estimates presented above are not necessarily indicative of the amounts we would realize in a current market exchange.
NOTE 12—STOCK- BASED COMPENSATION
Compensation Plans
We currently have:
four
plans under which outstanding options to purchase common stock, shares of restricted stock or restricted stock units have been, or may in the future be, granted to our officers, employees and non-employee directors (the 2000 Incentive Compensation Plan (Employee Plan), the 2006 Incentive Plan, the 2006 Stock Plan for Directors, and the 2012 Incentive Plan);
one
plan under which executive officers may receive common stock in lieu of compensation (the Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan); and
one
plan under which certain non-employee directors have received or may receive common stock in lieu of director fees (the Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan). These plans are referred to collectively as the “Plans.”
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we were permitted to issue shares and grant options, restricted stock and restricted stock units only under the Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, the Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan and the 2012 Incentive Plan. The 2006 Incentive Plan and the 2006 Stock Plan for Directors (collectively, the “2006 Plans”) expired on December 31, 2012, and
no
additional grants were permitted under those Plans after that date.
The number of shares initially reserved for issuance and the number of shares available for future grants or issuance under these Plans as of
December 31, 2017
were as follows:
•
Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
0.6 million
shares were reserved initially for issuance to our executive officers in lieu of the payment of all or a portion of their salary, at their option, and
0.6 million
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2017
.
•
Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan—
0.6 million
shares were reserved initially for issuance to nonemployee directors in lieu of the payment of all or a portion of their retainer and meeting fees, at their option, and
0.5 million
shares were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2017
.
•
2012 Incentive Plan—
10.5 million
shares (plus the number of shares or options outstanding under the 2006 Plans as of December 31, 2012 that were or are subsequently forfeited or expire unexercised) were reserved initially for grants or issuance to employees and non-employee directors, and
4.1 million
shares (plus the number of shares or options outstanding under the 2006 Plans as of
December 31, 2017
that were or are subsequently forfeited or expire unexercised) were available for future issuance as of
December 31, 2017
.
115
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Outstanding options issued under the Plans are exercisable at the market price on the date of grant, expire
ten
years from the date of grant, and vest or have vested over periods of
two
or
three
years. If provided in the applicable Plan or award agreement, the vesting of stock options may accelerate upon a change of control (as defined in the applicable Plan) of Ventas, Inc. and other specified events.
On January 18, 2017, the Executive Compensation Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) of our Board of Directors approved a 2017 long-term incentive compensation program for our named executive officers (the “2017 LTIP”) pursuant to the 2012 Incentive Plan. Several changes were made covering 2017, including: (1) in prior years, long-term incentive compensation awards were granted following and based on the satisfaction of specified performance goals (i.e., “retrospective”), and in 2017, performance-based awards made pursuant to the 2017 LTIP generally will be earned at a higher or lower level based on future performance (i.e., “prospective”); and (2) certain transition awards and modified vesting provisions apply. Under the 2017 LTIP, the aggregate target award value for each named executive officer is allocated such that
60%
of the value is performance-based, in the form of performance-based restricted stock units, and
40%
of the value is in the form of time-based restricted stock units. The Compensation Committee eliminated qualitative or discretionary goals from the 2017 LTIP, which previously comprised
50%
of the award opportunity.
Stock Options
In determining the estimated fair value of our stock options as of the date of grant, we used the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions:
2017
2016
2015
Risk-free interest rate
1.69-1.87%
0.93-1.27%
1.02 - 1.38%
Dividend yield
6.00
%
5.50
%
5.00
%
Volatility factors of the expected market price for our common stock
21.5-21.6%
19.1-20.6%
19.0 - 20.0%
Weighted average expected life of options
4.0 years
4.0 years
4.0 years
The following is a summary of stock option activity in
2017
:
Shares (000’s)
Weighted Average
Exercise Price
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life (years)
Intrinsic
Value
($000’s)
Outstanding as of December 31, 2016
3,805
$
56.05
Options granted
1,626
61.93
Options exercised
(349
)
46.70
Options forfeited
(57
)
58.87
Outstanding as of December 31, 2017
5,025
58.57
7.2
$
19,522
Exercisable as of December 31, 2017
3,407
$
57.01
6.5
$
18,602
Compensation costs for all share-based awards are based on the grant date fair value and are recognized on a straight-line basis during the requisite service periods, with charges recorded in general and administrative expenses. Compensation costs related to stock options for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
were
$4.8 million
,
$6.2 million
and
$4.2 million
, respectively.
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$2.9 million
of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested stock options granted under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.20
years.
The weighted average grant date fair value per share of options issued during the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
was
$5.23
,
$4.73
and
$5.89
, respectively.
Aggregate proceeds received from options exercised under the Plans for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
were
$16.3 million
,
$20.4 million
and
$6.4 million
, respectively. The total intrinsic value at exercise of options exercised during the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
was
$7.0 million
,
$8.0 million
and
$4.7 million
, respectively. There was
no
deferred income tax benefit for stock options exercised.
116
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units
We recognize the fair value of shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units on the grant date of the award as stock-based compensation expense over the requisite service period, with charges to general and administrative expenses of
$21.7 million
,
$14.7 million
and
$15.2 million
in
2017
,
2016
and
2015
, respectively. Restricted stock and restricted stock units generally vest over periods ranging from
two
to
five
years. If provided in the applicable Plan or award agreement, the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units may accelerate upon a change of control (as defined in the applicable Plan) of Ventas and other specified events.
A summary of the status of our non-vested restricted stock and restricted stock units as of
December 31, 2017
, and changes during the year ended
December 31, 2017
follows:
Restricted
Stock
(000’s)
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Restricted
Stock Units (000’s)
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
Nonvested at December 31, 2016
312
$
57.29
15
$
58.70
Granted
283
59.99
409
62.07
Vested
(258
)
58.82
(10
)
59.59
Forfeited
(18
)
58.95
—
—
Nonvested at December 31, 2017
319
$
58.36
414
$
62.01
As of
December 31, 2017
, we had
$22.5 million
of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock and restricted stock units under the Plans. We expect to recognize that cost over a weighted average period of
1.54
years. The total fair value at the vesting date for restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
was
$16.6 million
,
$13.9 million
and
$18.3 million
, respectively.
Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan
We have in effect an Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) under which our employees and directors may purchase shares of our common stock at a discount. Pursuant to the terms of the ESPP, on each purchase date, participants may purchase shares of common stock at a price not less than
90%
of the market price on that date (with respect to the employee tax-favored portion of the plan) and not less than
95%
of the market price on that date (with respect to the additional employee and director portion of the plan). We initially reserved
3.0 million
shares for issuance under the ESPP. As of
December 31, 2017
,
0.1 million
shares had been purchased under the ESPP and
2.9 million
shares were available for future issuance.
Employee Benefit Plan
We maintain a 401(k) plan that allows eligible employees to defer compensation subject to certain limitations imposed by the Code. In
2017
, we made contributions for each qualifying employee of up to
3.5%
of his or her salary, subject to certain limitations. During
2017
,
2016
and
2015
, our aggregate contributions were approximately
$1.4 million
,
$1.3 million
and
$1.2 million
, respectively.
NOTE 13—INCOME TAXES
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the applicable provisions of the Code for every year beginning with the year ended December 31, 1999. We have also elected for certain of our subsidiaries to be treated as TRS entities, which are subject to federal, state and foreign income taxes. All entities other than the TRS entities are collectively referred to as the “REIT” within this Note. Certain REIT entities are subject to foreign income tax.
117
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Although we intend to continue to operate in a manner that will enable us to qualify as a REIT, such qualification depends upon our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various distribution, stock ownership and other tests. During the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, our tax treatment of distributions per common share was as follows:
2017
2016
2015
Tax treatment of distributions:
Ordinary income
$
1.02814
$
2.68216
$
3.02368
Qualified ordinary income
0.00337
0.05794
0.01632
Long-term capital gain
1.07836
0.11613
—
Unrecaptured Section 1250 gain
0.21513
0.10877
—
Distribution reported for 1099-DIV purposes
$
2.32500
$
2.96500
$
3.04000
Add: Dividend declared in current year and taxable in following year
0.79000
—
—
Distribution declared per common share outstanding
$
3.11500
$
2.96500
$
3.04000
We believe we have met the annual REIT distribution requirement by payment of at least
90%
of our estimated taxable income for
2017
,
2016
and
2015
. Our consolidated benefit for income taxes for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
was as follows:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Current - Federal
$
(5,672
)
$
(2,991
)
$
138
Current - State
1,119
1,241
1,453
Deferred - Federal
(54,396
)
(19,539
)
(25,962
)
Deferred - State
3,237
(3,634
)
(3,054
)
Current - Foreign
2,307
1,067
953
Deferred - Foreign
(6,394
)
(7,487
)
(12,812
)
Total
$
(59,799
)
$
(31,343
)
$
(39,284
)
The 2017 income tax benefit is primarily due to accounting for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “2017 Tax Act”), specifically a
$64.5 million
benefit from the reduced U.S. federal corporate tax rate on net deferred tax liabilities and an offsetting expense of
$23.3 million
to establish a valuation allowance on deferred interest carryforwards, losses of certain TRS entities and the release of a tax reserve. The 2016 income tax benefit was due primarily to losses of certain TRS entities, the reversal of a net deferred tax liability at one TRS and the release of a tax reserve.
Although the TRS entities have paid minimal cash federal income taxes for the year ended
December 31, 2017
, their federal income tax liabilities may increase in future years as we exhaust net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and as our senior living and other business segments grow. Such increases could be significant.
118
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of income tax expense and benefit, which is computed by applying the federal corporate tax rate for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, to the income tax benefit is as follows:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Tax at statutory rate on earnings from continuing operations before unconsolidated entities, noncontrolling interest and income taxes
$
204,742
$
181,478
$
123,086
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
(1,115
)
(1,022
)
(657
)
Increase in valuation allowance from ordinary operations
8,237
3,921
20,978
Decrease in ASC 740 income tax liability
(4,750
)
(3,582
)
(462
)
Tax at statutory rate on earnings not subject to federal income taxes
(231,379
)
(209,204
)
(185,648
)
Foreign rate differential and foreign taxes
6,407
2,094
3,095
Change in tax status of TRS
(690
)
(5,629
)
—
Effect of the 2017 Tax Act
(41,212
)
—
—
Other differences
(39
)
601
324
Income tax benefit
$
(59,799
)
$
(31,343
)
$
(39,284
)
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017
On December 22, 2017, the 2017 Tax Act was signed into law making significant changes to the Internal Revenue Code. The changes to existing U.S. tax laws as a result of the 2017 Tax Act, which we believe have the most significant impact on the Company’s federal income taxes are as follows:
The 2017 Tax Act reduces the corporate tax rate to
21%
, effective January 1, 2018. Consequently, the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities were remeasured to reflect the reduction in the U.S. corporate income tax rate. We have recorded a decrease related to TRS net deferred tax liabilities of
$19.9 million
and a decrease to the associated valuation allowances of
$44.6 million
, with a corresponding net adjustment to deferred income tax benefit of
$64.5 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2017
.
The 2017 Tax Act amended the interest expense limitation rules applicable to business entities. An election is available under the 2017 Tax Act to be excluded from the new interest limitation provision for “real property trade or businesses.” We have made a reasonable estimate that the new interest limitation rules may disallow the deferred interest carried forward under the rules prior to the 2017 Tax Act. Consequently, we have recorded a provisional adjustment of
$23.3 million
for the entire deferred tax asset related to the existing deferred interest carryforward. We will recognize any changes to provisional amounts as we continue to analyze the existing statute or as additional guidance becomes available. We expect to complete our analysis of the provisional amounts by the end of 2018.
The 2017 Tax Act requires a one-time transition tax on the mandatory deemed repatriation of cumulative foreign earnings as of
December 31, 2017
. The Company believes that no such tax will be due as there are no accumulated foreign earnings applicable to the mandatory deemed repatriation.
We did not identify items for which the income tax effects of the 2017 Tax Act have not been completed and a reasonable estimate could not be determined as of
December 31, 2017
. Our analysis of the 2017 Tax Act may be impacted by new legislation, the Congressional Joint Committee Staff, Treasury, or other guidance. Based on the 2017 Tax Act as enacted, we do not believe there will be further material impacts to the financial statements related to the other 2017 Tax Act provisions but cannot assure you as to the outcome of this matter.
119
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Each TRS is a tax paying component for purposes of classifying deferred tax assets and liabilities. The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards included in the net deferred tax liabilities at
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
are summarized as follows:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Property, primarily differences in depreciation and amortization, the tax basis of land assets and the treatment of interests and certain costs
$
(300,395
)
$
(409,803
)
$
(413,566
)
Operating loss and interest deduction carryforwards
146,732
195,415
180,575
Expense accruals and other
12,890
18,185
14,624
Valuation allowance
(109,319
)
(120,438
)
(120,015
)
Net deferred tax liabilities
$
(250,092
)
$
(316,641
)
$
(338,382
)
We established beginning net deferred tax assets and liabilities related to temporary differences between the financial reporting and the tax bases of assets acquired and liabilities assumed (primarily property, intangible and related assets, net of NOL carryforwards), for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016, and 2015, in connection with the following acquisitions:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
2015 HCT acquisition
$
—
$
—
$
(32,336
)
2015 UK acquisition
—
—
(18,569
)
2016 Life Sciences Acquisition
19,262
(9,446
)
—
2017 miscellaneous acquisitions
(4,510
)
—
—
Established beginning deferred tax assets or liabilities
$
14,752
$
(9,446
)
$
(50,905
)
Our net deferred tax liability decreased
$66.5 million
during
2017
primarily due to accounting for the 2017 Tax Act, specifically a
$64.5 million
benefit from the reduced U.S. federal corporate tax rate on net deferred tax liabilities and an offsetting expense of
$23.3 million
to establish a provisional adjustment on deferred interest carryforwards, the impact of TRS operating losses, currency translation adjustments, and purchase accounting adjustments. Our net deferred tax liability decreased
$21.7 million
during
2016
primarily due to the reversal of a net deferred tax liability at one TRS and the impact of TRS operating losses and currency translation adjustments, offset by
$9.4 million
of recorded deferred tax liability as a result of the Life Sciences Acquisition.
Due to uncertainty regarding the realization of certain deferred tax assets, we have established valuation allowances, primarily in connection with the NOL carryforwards related to certain TRSs. The amounts related to NOLs at the TRS entities for
2017
,
2016
, and
2015
are
$67.1 million
,
$84.7 million
and
$85.5 million
, respectively.
120
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A rollforward of valuation allowances, for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, is as follows:
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
120,438
$
120,015
$
97,550
Additions:
Purchase accounting
—
—
1,002
Expenses
(1)
9,277
6,589
21,375
Subtractions:
Deductions
(1)
(1,040
)
(2,668
)
(397
)
Effect of the 2017 Tax Act
(21,321
)
—
—
State income tax, net of federal impact
956
536
529
Other activity (not resulting in expense or deduction)
1,009
(4,034
)
(44
)
Ending balance
$
109,319
$
120,438
$
120,015
(1)
Generally, Expenses and Deductions are increases and decreases, respectively, in TRS valuation allowances, the latter being through utilization or release. The net amount equals the increase in valuation allowance on the reconciliation of income tax expense and benefit schedule above.
We are subject to corporate level taxes (“built-in gains tax”) for any asset dispositions during the
five
-year period immediately after the assets were owned by a C corporation (either prior to our REIT election, through stock acquisition or merger). The amount of income potentially subject to built-in gains tax is generally equal to the lesser of the excess of the fair value of the asset over its adjusted tax basis as of the date it became a REIT asset or the actual amount of gain. Some, but not all, future gains could be offset by available NOL carryforwards.
At
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, the REIT had NOL carryforwards of
$625.8 million
,
$1.1 billion
and
$1.1 billion
, respectively. Additionally, the REIT has
$14.4 million
of federal income tax credits that were carried over from acquisitions. These amounts can be used to offset future taxable income (and/or taxable income for prior years if an audit determines that tax is owed), if any. The REIT will be entitled to utilize NOLs and tax credit carryforwards only to the extent that REIT taxable income exceeds our deduction for dividends paid. Certain NOL and credit carryforwards are limited as to their utilization by Section 382 of the Code. The remaining REIT carryforwards begin to expire in 2024.
For the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, the net difference between tax bases and the reported amount of REIT assets and liabilities for federal income tax purposes was approximately
$4.1 billion
and
$4.4 billion
, respectively, less than the book bases of those assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes.
Generally, we are subject to audit under the statute of limitations by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the year ended December 31, 2014 and subsequent years and are subject to audit by state taxing authorities for the year ended December 31, 2013 and subsequent years. We are subject to audit generally under the statutes of limitation by the Canada Revenue Agency and provincial authorities with respect to the Canadian entities for the year ended December 31, 2013 and subsequent years. We are also subject to audit in Canada for periods subsequent to the acquisition, and certain prior periods, with respect to entities acquired in 2014 from Holiday Retirement. We are subject to audit in the United Kingdom generally for the periods ended in and subsequent to 2016.
The following table summarizes the activity related to our unrecognized tax benefits:
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Balance as of January 1
$
20,950
$
24,135
Additions to tax positions related to prior years
648
222
Subtractions to tax positions related to prior years
(497
)
—
Subtractions to tax positions as a result of the lapse of the statute of limitations
(4,336
)
(3,407
)
Balance as of December 31
$
16,765
$
20,950
121
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Included in these unrecognized tax benefits of
$16.8 million
and
$21.0 million
at
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively, were
$15.0 million
and
$19.3 million
of tax benefits at
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, respectively, that, if recognized, would reduce our annual effective tax rate. We accrued interest of
$0.2 million
related to the unrecognized tax benefits during
2017
, but
no
penalties. We expect our unrecognized tax benefits to decrease by
$2.6 million
during
2018
, as a result of the lapse of the statute of limitations.
As a part of the transfer pricing structure in the normal course of business, the REIT enters into transactions with certain TRSs, such as leasing transactions, other capital financing and allocation of general and administrative costs, which transactions are intended to comply with Internal Revenue Service and foreign tax authority transfer pricing rules.
NOTE 14—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Proceedings against Tenants, Operators and Managers
From time to time, Atria, Sunrise, Brookdale Senior Living, Ardent, Kindred and our other tenants, operators and managers are parties to certain legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims arising in the conduct of their business and operations. Even though we generally are not party to these proceedings, the unfavorable resolution of any such actions, investigations or claims could, individually or in the aggregate, materially adversely affect such tenants’, operators’ or managers’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations and their ability to satisfy their respective obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Proceedings Indemnified and Defended by Third Parties
From time to time, we are party to certain legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims for which third parties are contractually obligated to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless. The tenants of our triple-net leased properties and, in some cases, their affiliates are required by the terms of their leases and other agreements with us to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against certain actions, investigations and claims arising in the course of their business and related to the operations of our triple-net leased properties. In addition, third parties from whom we acquired certain of our assets and, in some cases, their affiliates are required by the terms of the related conveyance documents to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against certain actions, investigations and claims related to the acquired assets and arising prior to our ownership or related to excluded assets and liabilities. In some cases, a portion of the purchase price consideration is held in escrow for a specified period of time as collateral for these indemnification obligations. We are presently being defended by certain tenants and other obligated third parties in these types of matters. We cannot assure you that our tenants, their affiliates or other obligated third parties will continue to defend us in these matters, that our tenants, their affiliates or other obligated third parties will have sufficient assets, income and access to financing to enable them to satisfy their defense and indemnification obligations to us or that any purchase price consideration held in escrow will be sufficient to satisfy claims for which we are entitled to indemnification. The unfavorable resolution of any such actions, investigations or claims could, individually or in the aggregate, materially adversely affect our tenants’ or other obligated third parties’ liquidity, financial condition or results of operations and their ability to satisfy their respective obligations to us, which, in turn, could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Proceedings Arising in Connection with Senior Living and Office Operations; Other Litigation
From time to time, we are party to various legal actions, regulatory investigations and claims (some of which may not be insured and some of which may allege large damage amounts) arising in connection with our senior living and office operations or otherwise in the course of our business. In limited circumstances, the manager of the applicable seniors housing community, MOB or life science and innovation center may be contractually obligated to indemnify, defend and hold us harmless against such actions, investigations and claims. It is the opinion of management that, except as otherwise set forth in this
Note 14
, that the disposition of any such actions, investigations and claims that are currently pending will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a Material Adverse Effect on us. However, regardless of their merits, we may be forced to expend significant financial resources to defend and resolve these matters. We are unable to predict the ultimate outcome of these actions, investigations and claims, and if management’s assessment of our liability with respect thereto is incorrect, such actions, investigations and claims could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Certain Obligations, Liabilities and Litigation
We may be subject to various obligations, liabilities and litigation assumed in connection with or arising out of our acquisitions or otherwise arising in connection with our business, some of which may be indemnifiable by third parties. If these liabilities are greater than expected or were not known to us at the time of acquisition, if we are not entitled to indemnification,
122
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
or if the responsible third party fails to indemnify us, such obligations, liabilities and litigation could have a Material Adverse Effect on us. In addition, in connection with the sale or leasing of our properties, we may incur various obligations and liabilities, including indemnification obligations to the buyer or tenant, relating to the operations of those properties, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on us.
Other
With respect to certain of our properties, we are subject to operating and ground lease obligations that generally require fixed monthly or annual rent payments and may include escalation clauses and renewal options. These leases have terms that expire during the next
84
years, excluding extension options.
As of
December 31, 2017
, our future minimum lease obligations under non-cancelable operating and ground leases were as follows:
Lease Payments
(In thousands)
2018
$
27,498
2019
23,953
2020
23,206
2021
22,651
2022
17,738
Thereafter
623,462
Total
$
738,508
NOTE 15—EARNINGS PER SHARE
The following table shows the amounts used in computing our basic and diluted earnings per common share:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Numerator for basic and diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations
$
643,949
$
554,209
$
389,539
Discontinued operations
(110
)
(922
)
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
98,203
18,580
Net income
1,361,112
651,490
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
4,642
2,259
1,379
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
1,356,470
$
649,231
$
417,843
Denominator:
Denominator for basic earnings per share—weighted average shares
355,326
344,703
330,311
Effect of dilutive securities:
Stock options
494
569
360
Restricted stock awards
265
176
41
OP Unitholder interests
2,481
2,942
3,295
Denominator for diluted earnings per share—adjusted weighted average shares
358,566
348,390
334,007
Basic earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations
$
1.81
$
1.61
$
1.18
Net income attributable to common stockholders
3.82
1.88
1.26
Diluted earnings per share:
Income from continuing operations
$
1.80
$
1.59
$
1.17
Net income attributable to common stockholders
3.78
1.86
1.25
123
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
There were
3.0 million
,
1.4 million
and
0.9 million
anti-dilutive options outstanding for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, respectively.
NOTE 16—PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY EQUITY
Capital Stock
During the year ended
December 31, 2017
, we issued and sold
1.1 million
shares of common stock under our “at-the-market” (“ATM”) equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$73.9 million
, after sales agent commissions. As of
December 31, 2017
, approximately
$155.6 million
of our common stock remained available for sale under our ATM equity offering program.
For the year ended
December 31, 2016
, we issued and sold a total of
18.9 million
shares of our common stock under our ATM equity offering program and public offerings. Aggregate net proceeds for these activities were
$1.3 billion
, after sales agent commissions. We used the proceeds to fund a portion of the Life Sciences Acquisition, for working capital and other general corporate purposes. See “
NOTE 4—ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PROPERTY
” for additional information.
In January 2015, in connection with the HCT acquisition, we issued approximately
28.4 million
shares of our common stock and
1.1 million
Class C Units that were redeemable for our common stock.
For the year ended
December 31, 2015
, we issued and sold a total of
7.2 million
shares of common stock under our ATM equity offering program for aggregate net proceeds of
$491.6 million
, after sales agent commissions.
Excess Share Provision
In order to preserve our ability to maintain REIT status, our Charter provides that if a person acquires beneficial ownership of more than
9%
of our outstanding common stock or
9.9%
of our outstanding preferred stock, the shares that are beneficially owned in excess of such limit are deemed to be excess shares. These shares are automatically deemed transferred to a trust for the benefit of a charitable institution or other qualifying organization selected by our Board of Directors. The trust is entitled to all dividends with respect to the shares and the trustee may exercise all voting power over the shares.
We have the right to buy the excess shares for a purchase price equal to the lesser of the price per share in the transaction that created the excess shares or the market price on the date we buy the shares, and we may defer payment of the purchase price for the excess shares for up to
five
years. If we do not purchase the excess shares, the trustee of the trust is required to transfer the excess shares at the direction of the Board of Directors. The owner of the excess shares is entitled to receive the lesser of the proceeds from the sale or the original purchase price for such excess shares, and any additional amounts are payable to the beneficiary of the trust. As of
December 31, 2017
, there were
no
shares in the trust.
Our Board of Directors is empowered to grant waivers from the excess share provisions of our Charter.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
The following is a summary of our accumulated other comprehensive loss as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
:
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Foreign currency translation
$
(45,580
)
$
(66,192
)
Accumulated unrealized gain on government-sponsored pooled loan investments
802
1,239
Other
9,658
7,419
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss
$
(35,120
)
$
(57,534
)
The change in foreign currency translation during the year ended
December 31, 2017
was due primarily to the remeasurement of our properties located in the United Kingdom.
124
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
The following is a rollforward of our redeemable OP Unitholder Interests and noncontrolling interests for
2017
:
Redeemable OP Unitholder Interests
Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests
Total Redeemable OP Unitholder and Noncontrolling Interests
(In thousands)
Balance as of December 31, 2016
$
177,177
$
23,551
$
200,728
New issuances
—
2,143
2,143
Change in valuation
(2,112
)
2,353
241
Distributions and other
(5,677
)
—
(5,677
)
Redemptions
(23,136
)
(15,809
)
(38,945
)
Balance as of December 31, 2017
$
146,252
$
12,238
$
158,490
During 2017, third party investors redeemed
53,728
OP Units and
341,776
Class C Units for
390,403
shares of Ventas common stock, valued at
$24.0 million
.
NOTE 17—RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
As disclosed in “
NOTE 3—CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT RISK
,” Atria provides comprehensive property management and accounting services with respect to our seniors housing communities that Atria operates, for which we pay annual management fees pursuant to long-term management agreements.
Most of our management agreements with Atria have initial terms expiring either July 31, 2024 or December 31, 2027, with successive automatic
ten
-year renewal periods. The management fees payable to Atria under most of the Atria management agreements range from
4.5%
to
5%
of revenues generated by the applicable properties, and Atria can earn up to an additional
1%
of revenues based on the achievement of specified performance targets.
Atria also provides certain construction and development management services relating to various development and redevelopment projects within our seniors housing portfolio. For the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
and
2015
, we incurred fees to Atria of
$59.7 million
,
$58.7 million
, and
$58.0 million
respectively, the majority of which are recorded within property-level operating expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
As disclosed in “
NOTE 4—ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PROPERTY
,”
we leased
10
hospital campuses to Ardent pursuant to a single, triple-net master lease agreement. Pursuant to our master lease agreement, Ardent is obligated to pay base rent, which escalates annually by the lesser of
four
times the increase in the consumer price index for the relevant period and
2.5%
. The initial term of the master lease expires on August 31, 2035 and Ardent has
one
ten
-year renewal option.
For the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
, and the period from the closing of the Ardent Transaction through December 31,
2015
, we recognized rental income from Ardent of
$110.8 million
,
$106.9 million
, and
$42.9 million
, respectively. In 2015, as part of the closing, we also paid certain transaction-related fees to Ardent of
$40.0 million
, which are recorded within merger-related expenses and deal costs in our Consolidated Statements of Income.
These transactions are considered to be arm’s length in nature and on terms consistent with transactions with unaffiliated third parties.
125
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 18—QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
Summarized unaudited consolidated quarterly information for the years ended
December 31, 2017
and
2016
is provided below.
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues
$
883,443
$
895,490
$
899,928
$
895,288
Income from continuing operations
$
155,912
$
152,272
$
156,930
$
178,835
Discontinued operations
(53
)
(23
)
(19
)
(15
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
43,289
719
458,280
214,985
Net income
199,148
152,968
615,191
393,805
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
1,021
1,137
1,233
1,251
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
198,127
$
151,831
$
613,958
$
392,554
Earnings per share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations
$
0.44
$
0.43
$
0.44
$
0.50
Net income attributable to common stockholders
0.56
0.43
1.72
1.10
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations
$
0.44
$
0.42
$
0.44
$
0.50
Net income attributable to common stockholders
0.55
0.42
1.71
1.09
Dividends declared per share
$
0.775
$
0.775
$
0.775
$
0.79
For the Year Ended December 31, 2016
First
Quarter
Second
Quarter
Third
Quarter
Fourth
Quarter
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Revenues
$
852,289
$
848,404
$
867,116
$
875,713
Income from continuing operations
$
123,339
$
137,849
$
150,446
$
142,575
Discontinued operations
(489
)
(148
)
(118
)
(167
)
Gain (loss) on real estate dispositions
26,184
5,739
(144
)
66,424
Net income
149,034
143,440
150,184
208,832
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
54
278
732
1,195
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
148,980
$
143,162
$
149,452
$
207,637
Earnings per share:
Basic:
Income from continuing operations
$
0.37
$
0.41
$
0.43
$
0.40
Net income attributable to common stockholders
0.44
0.42
0.43
0.59
Diluted:
Income from continuing operations
$
0.36
$
0.40
$
0.42
$
0.40
Net income attributable to common stockholders
0.44
0.42
0.42
0.58
Dividends declared per share
$
0.73
$
0.73
$
0.73
$
0.775
126
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 19—SEGMENT INFORMATION
As of
December 31, 2017
, we operated through
three
reportable business segments: triple-net leased properties, senior living operations and office operations. Under our triple-net leased properties segment, we invest in and own seniors housing and healthcare properties throughout the United States and the United Kingdom and lease those properties to healthcare operating companies under “triple-net” or “absolute-net” leases that obligate the tenants to pay all property-related expenses. In our senior living operations segment, we invest in seniors housing communities throughout the United States and Canada and engage independent operators, such as Atria and Sunrise, to manage those communities. In our office operations segment, we primarily acquire, own, develop, lease and manage MOBs and life science and innovation centers throughout the United States. Information provided for “all other” includes income from loans and investments and other miscellaneous income and various corporate-level expenses not directly attributable to any of our
three
reportable business segments. Assets included in “all other” consist primarily of corporate assets, including cash, restricted cash, loans receivable and investments, and miscellaneous accounts receivable.
Our chief operating decision makers evaluate performance of the combined properties in each reportable business segment and determine how to allocate resources to those segments, in significant part, based on segment NOI and related measures.
We define segment NOI as total revenues, less interest and other income, property-level operating expenses and office building services costs. We consider segment NOI useful because it allows investors, analysts and our management to measure unlevered property-level operating results and to compare our operating results to the operating results of other real estate companies between periods on a consistent basis. In order to facilitate a clear understanding of our historical consolidated operating results, segment NOI should be examined in conjunction with income from continuing operations as presented in our Consolidated Financial Statements and other financial data included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Interest expense, depreciation and amortization, general, administrative and professional fees, income tax expense and other non-property specific revenues and expenses are not allocated to individual reportable business segments for purposes of assessing segment performance. There are
no
intersegment sales or transfers.
127
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Summary information by reportable business segment is as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
Office
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
840,131
$
—
$
753,467
$
—
$
1,593,598
Resident fees and services
—
1,843,232
—
—
1,843,232
Office building and other services revenue
4,580
—
7,497
1,600
13,677
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
117,608
117,608
Interest and other income
—
—
—
6,034
6,034
Total revenues
$
844,711
$
1,843,232
$
760,964
$
125,242
$
3,574,149
Total revenues
$
844,711
$
1,843,232
$
760,964
$
125,242
$
3,574,149
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
6,034
6,034
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,250,065
233,007
—
1,483,072
Office building services costs
—
—
3,391
—
3,391
Segment NOI
844,711
593,167
524,566
119,208
2,081,652
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
845
(61
)
503
(1,848
)
(561
)
Segment profit
$
845,556
$
593,106
$
525,069
$
117,360
2,081,091
Interest and other income
6,034
Interest expense
(448,196
)
Depreciation and amortization
(887,948
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(135,490
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(754
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(10,535
)
Other
(20,052
)
Income tax benefit
59,799
Income from continuing operations
$
643,949
128
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the Year Ended December 31, 2016
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
Office
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
845,834
$
—
$
630,342
$
—
$
1,476,176
Resident fees and services
—
1,847,306
—
—
1,847,306
Office building and other services revenue
4,921
—
13,029
3,120
21,070
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
98,094
98,094
Interest and other income
—
—
—
876
876
Total revenues
$
850,755
$
1,847,306
$
643,371
$
102,090
$
3,443,522
Total revenues
$
850,755
$
1,847,306
$
643,371
$
102,090
$
3,443,522
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
876
876
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,242,978
191,784
—
1,434,762
Office building services costs
—
—
7,311
—
7,311
Segment NOI
850,755
604,328
444,276
101,214
2,000,573
Income from unconsolidated entities
2,363
1,265
590
140
4,358
Segment profit
$
853,118
$
605,593
$
444,866
$
101,354
2,004,931
Interest and other income
876
Interest expense
(419,740
)
Depreciation and amortization
(898,924
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(126,875
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(2,779
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(24,635
)
Other
(9,988
)
Income tax benefit
31,343
Income from continuing operations
$
554,209
129
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
For the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Triple-Net
Leased
Properties
Senior
Living
Operations
Office
Operations
All
Other
Total
(In thousands)
Revenues:
Rental income
$
779,801
$
—
$
566,245
$
—
$
1,346,046
Resident fees and services
—
1,811,255
—
—
1,811,255
Office building and other services revenue
4,433
—
34,436
2,623
41,492
Income from loans and investments
—
—
—
86,553
86,553
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,052
1,052
Total revenues
$
784,234
$
1,811,255
$
600,681
$
90,228
$
3,286,398
Total revenues
$
784,234
$
1,811,255
$
600,681
$
90,228
$
3,286,398
Less:
Interest and other income
—
—
—
1,052
1,052
Property-level operating expenses
—
1,209,415
174,225
—
1,383,640
Office building services costs
—
—
26,565
—
26,565
Segment NOI
784,234
601,840
399,891
89,176
1,875,141
(Loss) income from unconsolidated entities
(813
)
(526
)
369
(450
)
(1,420
)
Segment profit
$
783,421
$
601,314
$
400,260
$
88,726
1,873,721
Interest and other income
1,052
Interest expense
(367,114
)
Depreciation and amortization
(894,057
)
General, administrative and professional fees
(128,035
)
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
(14,411
)
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
(102,944
)
Other
(17,957
)
Income tax benefit
39,284
Income from continuing operations
$
389,539
Assets by reportable business segment are as follows:
As of December 31,
2017
2016
(Dollars in thousands)
Assets:
Triple-net leased properties
$
7,778,064
32.4
%
$
7,627,792
32.9
%
Senior living operations
7,654,609
32.0
7,826,262
33.8
Office operations
6,897,696
28.8
6,614,454
28.6
All other assets
1,624,172
6.8
1,098,092
4.7
Total assets
$
23,954,541
100.0
%
$
23,166,600
100.0
%
130
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Capital expenditures, including investments in real estate property and development project expenditures, by reportable business segment are as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Capital expenditures:
Triple-net leased properties
$
169,661
$
74,192
$
1,890,245
Senior living operations
149,449
105,614
382,877
Office operations
492,765
1,503,304
604,827
Total capital expenditures
$
811,875
$
1,683,110
$
2,877,949
Our portfolio of properties and mortgage loan and other investments are located in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. Revenues are attributed to an individual country based on the location of each property. Geographic information regarding our operations is as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Revenues:
United States
$
3,361,682
$
3,242,353
$
3,086,449
Canada
186,049
174,831
173,778
United Kingdom
26,418
26,338
26,171
Total revenues
$
3,574,149
$
3,443,522
$
3,286,398
As of December 31,
2017
2016
(In thousands)
Net real estate property:
United States
$
19,219,650
$
19,105,939
Canada
1,070,903
1,037,105
United Kingdom
297,827
251,710
Total net real estate property
$
20,588,380
$
20,394,754
NOTE 20—CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING INFORMATION
Ventas, Inc. has fully and unconditionally guaranteed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Realty, including the senior notes that were jointly issued with Ventas Capital Corporation. Ventas Capital Corporation is a direct
100%
owned subsidiary of Ventas Realty that has
no
assets or operations, but was formed in 2002 solely to facilitate offerings of senior notes by a limited partnership. None of our other subsidiaries (such subsidiaries, excluding Ventas Realty and Ventas Capital Corporation, the “Ventas Subsidiaries”) is obligated with respect to Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes. Certain of Ventas Realty’s outstanding senior notes reflected in our condensed consolidating information were issued jointly with Ventas Capital Corporation.
Ventas, Inc. has also fully and unconditionally guaranteed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by our
100%
owned subsidiary, Ventas Canada Finance Limited. None of our other subsidiaries is obligated with respect to Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s outstanding senior notes, all of which were issued on a private placement basis in Canada.
In connection with the NHP acquisition, our
100%
owned subsidiary, NHP LLC, as successor to NHP, assumed the obligation to pay principal and interest with respect to the outstanding senior notes issued by NHP. Neither we nor any of our subsidiaries (other than NHP LLC) is obligated with respect to any of NHP LLC’s outstanding senior notes.
Under certain circumstances, contractual and legal restrictions, including those contained in the instruments governing our subsidiaries’ outstanding mortgage indebtedness, may restrict our ability to obtain cash from our subsidiaries for the
131
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
purpose of meeting our debt service obligations, including our payment guarantees with respect to Ventas Realty’s and Ventas Canada Finance Limited’s senior notes.
The following summarizes our condensed consolidating information as of
December 31, 2017
and
2016
and for the years ended
December 31, 2017
,
2016
, and
2015
:
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
As of December 31, 2017
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
1,844
$
119,508
$
21,937,026
$
—
$
22,058,378
Cash and cash equivalents
9,828
—
71,527
—
81,355
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
39,816
128
66,954
—
106,898
Investment in and advances to affiliates
14,786,086
2,916,060
—
(17,702,146
)
—
Goodwill
—
—
1,034,641
—
1,034,641
Assets held for sale
—
—
100,324
—
100,324
Other assets
55,936
9,458
507,551
—
572,945
Total assets
$
14,893,510
$
3,045,154
$
23,718,023
$
(17,702,146
)
$
23,954,541
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
8,895,641
$
2,380,421
$
—
$
11,276,062
Intercompany loans
7,835,266
(7,127,624
)
(707,642
)
—
—
Accrued interest
(6,410
)
77,691
22,677
—
93,958
Accounts payable and other liabilities
381,512
24,635
776,405
—
1,182,552
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
—
—
61,202
—
61,202
Deferred income taxes
250,092
—
—
—
250,092
Total liabilities
8,460,460
1,870,343
2,533,063
—
12,863,866
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
158,490
—
158,490
Total equity
6,433,050
1,174,811
21,026,470
(17,702,146
)
10,932,185
Total liabilities and equity
$
14,893,510
$
3,045,154
$
23,718,023
$
(17,702,146
)
$
23,954,541
132
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
As of December 31, 2016
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas
Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Assets
Net real estate investments
$
2,007
$
173,259
$
21,017,430
$
—
$
21,192,696
Cash and cash equivalents
210,303
—
76,404
—
286,707
Escrow deposits and restricted cash
198
1,504
78,945
—
80,647
Investment in and advances to affiliates
14,166,255
2,938,442
—
(17,104,697
)
—
Goodwill
—
—
1,033,225
—
1,033,225
Assets held for sale
—
—
54,961
—
54,961
Other assets
35,468
6,791
476,105
—
518,364
Total assets
$
14,414,231
$
3,119,996
$
22,737,070
$
(17,104,697
)
$
23,166,600
Liabilities and equity
Liabilities:
Senior notes payable and other debt
$
—
$
8,406,979
$
2,720,347
$
—
$
11,127,326
Intercompany loans
6,996,162
(6,209,706
)
(786,456
)
—
—
Accrued interest
(1,753
)
67,156
18,359
—
83,762
Accounts payable and other liabilities
89,115
35,587
783,226
—
907,928
Liabilities related to assets held for sale
—
(1
)
1,463
—
1,462
Deferred income taxes
316,641
—
—
—
316,641
Total liabilities
7,400,165
2,300,015
2,736,939
—
12,437,119
Redeemable OP unitholder and noncontrolling interests
—
—
200,728
—
200,728
Total equity
7,014,066
819,981
19,799,403
(17,104,697
)
10,528,753
Total liabilities and equity
$
14,414,231
$
3,119,996
$
22,737,070
$
(17,104,697
)
$
23,166,600
133
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues
Rental income
$
2,383
$
178,165
$
1,413,050
$
—
$
1,593,598
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,843,232
—
1,843,232
Office building and other services revenues
—
—
13,677
—
13,677
Income from loans and investments
1,236
—
116,372
—
117,608
Equity earnings in affiliates
488,862
—
(1,620
)
(487,242
)
—
Interest and other income
5,388
—
646
—
6,034
Total revenues
497,869
178,165
3,385,357
(487,242
)
3,574,149
Expenses
Interest
(101,222
)
319,630
229,788
—
448,196
Depreciation and amortization
5,483
7,510
874,955
—
887,948
Property-level operating expenses
—
329
1,482,743
—
1,483,072
Office building services costs
—
—
3,391
—
3,391
General, administrative and professional fees
2,056
16,976
116,458
—
135,490
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt, net
—
943
(189
)
—
754
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
9,797
—
738
—
10,535
Other
2,247
1
17,804
—
20,052
Total expenses
(81,639
)
345,389
2,725,688
—
2,989,438
Income (loss) before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, real estate dispositions and noncontrolling interests
579,508
(167,224
)
659,669
(487,242
)
584,711
Income (loss) from unconsolidated entities
—
5,306
(5,867
)
—
(561
)
Income tax benefit
59,799
—
—
—
59,799
Income (loss) from continuing operations
639,307
(161,918
)
653,802
(487,242
)
643,949
Discontinued operations
(110
)
—
—
—
(110
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
717,273
—
—
—
717,273
Net income (loss)
1,356,470
(161,918
)
653,802
(487,242
)
1,361,112
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
4,642
—
4,642
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
1,356,470
$
(161,918
)
$
649,160
$
(487,242
)
$
1,356,470
134
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2016
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues
Rental income
$
2,670
$
196,991
$
1,276,515
$
—
$
1,476,176
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,847,306
—
1,847,306
Office building and other services revenues
1,605
—
19,465
—
21,070
Income from loans and investments
341
—
97,753
—
98,094
Equity earnings in affiliates
500,515
—
(1,223
)
(499,292
)
—
Interest and other income
666
—
210
—
876
Total revenues
505,797
196,991
3,240,026
(499,292
)
3,443,522
Expenses
Interest
(46,650
)
281,458
184,932
—
419,740
Depreciation and amortization
8,968
18,297
871,659
—
898,924
Property-level operating expenses
—
317
1,434,445
—
1,434,762
Office building services costs
—
—
7,311
—
7,311
General, administrative and professional fees
509
18,320
108,046
—
126,875
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
—
2,770
9
—
2,779
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
23,068
—
1,567
—
24,635
Other
(705
)
41
10,652
—
9,988
Total expenses
(14,810
)
321,203
2,618,621
—
2,925,014
Income (loss) before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations and noncontrolling interests
520,607
(124,212
)
621,405
(499,292
)
518,508
Income from unconsolidated entities
—
1,840
2,518
—
4,358
Income tax benefit
31,343
—
—
—
31,343
Income (loss) from continuing operations
551,950
(122,372
)
623,923
(499,292
)
554,209
Discontinued operations
(922
)
—
—
—
(922
)
Gain on real estate dispositions
98,203
—
—
—
98,203
Net income (loss)
649,231
(122,372
)
623,923
(499,292
)
651,490
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
2,259
—
2,259
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
649,231
$
(122,372
)
$
621,664
$
(499,292
)
$
649,231
135
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Revenues
Rental income
$
3,663
$
198,017
$
1,144,366
$
—
$
1,346,046
Resident fees and services
—
—
1,811,255
—
1,811,255
Office building and other services revenues
895
—
40,597
—
41,492
Income from loans and investments
8,605
534
77,414
—
86,553
Equity earnings in affiliates
458,213
—
(649
)
(457,564
)
—
Interest and other income
495
(6
)
563
—
1,052
Total revenues
471,871
198,545
3,073,546
(457,564
)
3,286,398
Expenses
Interest
(38,393
)
257,503
148,004
—
367,114
Depreciation and amortization
5,443
14,679
873,935
—
894,057
Property-level operating expenses
—
367
1,383,273
—
1,383,640
Office building services costs
—
—
26,565
—
26,565
General, administrative and professional fees
(321
)
20,777
107,579
—
128,035
Loss on extinguishment of debt, net
—
4,523
9,888
—
14,411
Merger-related expenses and deal costs
98,644
75
4,225
—
102,944
Other
(358
)
45
18,270
—
17,957
Total expenses
65,015
297,969
2,571,739
—
2,934,723
Income (loss) before unconsolidated entities, income taxes, discontinued operations, and noncontrolling interests
406,856
(99,424
)
501,807
(457,564
)
351,675
Loss from unconsolidated entities
—
(183
)
(1,237
)
—
(1,420
)
Income tax benefit
39,284
—
—
—
39,284
Income (loss) from continuing operations
446,140
(99,607
)
500,570
(457,564
)
389,539
Discontinued operations
(46,877
)
34,748
23,232
—
11,103
Gain on real estate dispositions
18,580
—
—
—
18,580
Net income (loss)
417,843
(64,859
)
523,802
(457,564
)
419,222
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
1,379
—
1,379
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
417,843
$
(64,859
)
$
522,423
$
(457,564
)
$
417,843
136
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income (loss)
$
1,356,470
$
(161,918
)
$
653,802
$
(487,242
)
$
1,361,112
Other comprehensive (loss) income:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
20,612
—
20,612
Unrealized loss on government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(437
)
—
—
—
(437
)
Other
—
—
2,239
—
2,239
Total other comprehensive (loss) income
(437
)
—
22,851
—
22,414
Comprehensive income (loss)
1,356,033
(161,918
)
676,653
(487,242
)
1,383,526
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
4,642
—
4,642
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
1,356,033
$
(161,918
)
$
672,011
$
(487,242
)
$
1,378,884
For the Year Ended December 31, 2016
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income (loss)
$
649,231
$
(122,372
)
$
623,923
$
(499,292
)
$
651,490
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
(52,266
)
—
(52,266
)
Unrealized loss on government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(310
)
—
—
—
(310
)
Other
—
—
2,607
—
2,607
Total other comprehensive loss
(310
)
—
(49,659
)
—
(49,969
)
Comprehensive income (loss)
648,921
(122,372
)
574,264
(499,292
)
601,521
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
2,259
—
2,259
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
648,921
$
(122,372
)
$
572,005
$
(499,292
)
$
599,262
For the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net income (loss)
$
417,843
$
(64,859
)
$
523,802
$
(457,564
)
$
419,222
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation
—
—
(14,792
)
—
(14,792
)
Unrealized loss on government-sponsored pooled loan investments
(5,236
)
—
—
—
(5,236
)
Other
—
—
(658
)
—
(658
)
Total other comprehensive loss
(5,236
)
—
(15,450
)
—
(20,686
)
Comprehensive income (loss)
412,607
(64,859
)
508,352
(457,564
)
398,536
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
—
—
1,379
—
1,379
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
412,607
$
(64,859
)
$
506,973
$
(457,564
)
$
397,157
137
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
$
150,548
$
(142,584
)
$
1,434,216
$
—
$
1,442,180
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(350,900
)
—
(29,332
)
—
(380,232
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
(4,633
)
—
(743,486
)
—
(748,119
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
537,144
—
287
—
537,431
Proceeds from loans receivable
47
—
101,050
—
101,097
Development project expenditures
—
—
(299,085
)
—
(299,085
)
Capital expenditures
—
(726
)
(131,832
)
—
(132,558
)
Distributions from unconsolidated entities
—
—
6,169
—
6,169
Investment in unconsolidated entities
—
—
(61,220
)
—
(61,220
)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
181,658
(726
)
(1,157,449
)
—
(976,517
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under revolving credit facilities
—
478,868
(94,085
)
—
384,783
Proceeds from debt
—
793,904
317,745
—
1,111,649
Repayment of debt
—
(778,606
)
(590,478
)
—
(1,369,084
)
Purchase of noncontrolling interests
(15,809
)
—
—
(15,809
)
Net change in intercompany debt
1,002,694
(917,917
)
(84,777
)
—
—
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(20,450
)
(6,847
)
—
(27,297
)
Issuance of common stock, net
73,596
—
—
—
73,596
Cash distribution (to) from affiliates
(804,901
)
587,511
217,390
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(827,285
)
—
—
—
(827,285
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
—
—
(5,677
)
—
(5,677
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interests
—
—
4,402
—
4,402
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
—
—
(11,187
)
—
(11,187
)
Other
10,582
—
—
—
10,582
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
(561,123
)
143,310
(253,514
)
—
(671,327
)
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
(228,917
)
—
23,253
—
(205,664
)
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
28,442
—
(28,130
)
—
312
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
210,303
—
76,404
—
286,707
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
9,828
$
—
$
71,527
$
—
$
81,355
138
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2016
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
$
69,496
$
(92,923
)
$
1,395,768
$
—
$
1,372,341
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(1,448,230
)
—
19,118
—
(1,429,112
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
—
—
(158,635
)
—
(158,635
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
257,441
—
43,120
—
300,561
Proceeds from loans receivable
—
—
320,082
—
320,082
Development project expenditures
—
—
(143,647
)
—
(143,647
)
Capital expenditures
—
(314
)
(117,142
)
—
(117,456
)
Investment in unconsolidated entities
—
—
(6,436
)
—
(6,436
)
Net cash used in investing activities
(1,190,789
)
(314
)
(43,540
)
—
(1,234,643
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under unsecured revolving credit facility
—
(171,000
)
135,363
—
(35,637
)
Proceeds from debt
—
846,521
46,697
—
893,218
Repayment of debt
—
(651,820
)
(370,293
)
—
(1,022,113
)
Net change in intercompany debt
990,056
82,266
(1,072,322
)
—
—
Purchase of noncontrolling interests
—
—
(2,846
)
—
(2,846
)
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(5,787
)
(768
)
—
(6,555
)
Issuance of common stock, net
1,286,680
—
—
—
1,286,680
Cash distribution from (to) affiliates
107,232
(6,943
)
(100,289
)
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(1,024,968
)
—
—
—
(1,024,968
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
—
—
(8,640
)
—
(8,640
)
Contributions from noncontrolling interests
—
—
7,326
—
7,326
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
—
—
(6,879
)
—
(6,879
)
Other
17,252
—
—
—
17,252
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
1,376,252
93,237
(1,372,651
)
—
96,838
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
254,959
—
(20,423
)
—
234,536
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(56,389
)
—
55,537
—
(852
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
11,733
—
41,290
—
53,023
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
210,303
$
—
$
76,404
$
—
$
286,707
139
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Ventas, Inc.
Ventas Realty
Ventas Subsidiaries
Consolidated
Elimination
Consolidated
(In thousands)
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities
$
(115,977
)
$
16,528
$
1,498,280
$
—
$
1,398,831
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net investment in real estate property
(2,650,788
)
—
—
—
(2,650,788
)
Investment in loans receivable and other
—
—
(171,144
)
—
(171,144
)
Proceeds from real estate disposals
492,408
—
—
—
492,408
Proceeds from loans receivable
—
—
109,176
—
109,176
Proceeds from sale or maturity of marketable securities
76,800
—
—
—
76,800
Funds held in escrow for future development expenditures
—
—
4,003
—
4,003
Development project expenditures
—
—
(119,674
)
—
(119,674
)
Capital expenditures
—
(15,733
)
(91,754
)
—
(107,487
)
Investment in unconsolidated entities
(26,282
)
—
(30,704
)
—
(56,986
)
Net cash used in investing activities
(2,107,862
)
(15,733
)
(300,097
)
—
(2,423,692
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net change in borrowings under unsecured revolving credit facility
—
(584,000
)
(139,457
)
—
(723,457
)
Net cash impact of CCP spin-off
1,273,000
—
(1,401,749
)
—
(128,749
)
Proceeds from debt
—
2,292,568
220,179
—
2,512,747
Issuance of debt related to CCP spin-off
—
—
1,400,000
—
1,400,000
Repayment of debt
—
(705,000
)
(730,596
)
—
(1,435,596
)
Net change in intercompany debt
1,782,954
(1,008,773
)
(774,181
)
—
—
Purchase of noncontrolling interests
—
—
(3,819
)
—
(3,819
)
Payment of deferred financing costs
—
(22,297
)
(2,368
)
—
(24,665
)
Issuance of common stock, net
491,023
—
—
—
491,023
Cash distribution (to) from affiliates
(315,466
)
26,707
288,759
—
—
Cash distribution to common stockholders
(1,003,413
)
—
—
—
(1,003,413
)
Cash distribution to redeemable OP unitholders
—
—
—
(15,095
)
—
(15,095
)
Purchases of redeemable OP units
—
—
(33,188
)
—
(33,188
)
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
—
—
(12,649
)
—
(12,649
)
Other
(81
)
—
—
—
(81
)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
2,228,017
(795
)
(1,204,164
)
—
1,023,058
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
4,178
—
(5,981
)
—
(1,803
)
Effect of foreign currency translation on cash and cash equivalents
(17,302
)
—
16,780
—
(522
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
24,857
—
30,491
—
55,348
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
$
11,733
$
—
$
41,290
$
—
$
53,023
140
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTE 21—SUBSEQUENT EVENT
In January 2018, we transitioned the management of
76
private pay seniors housing communities to Eclipse Senior Living (“ESL”). These assets, substantially all of which were previously leased by Elmcroft Senior Living (“Elmcroft”), are now operated by ESL under a management contract with us. We acquired a
34%
ownership stake in ESL with customary rights and protections. ESL management owns the remaining
66%
stake. We also intend to form a new joint venture with an institutional partner related to the assets previously leased by Elmcroft. However, there can be no assurance whether, when or on what terms the joint venture will be completed.
141
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
Allowance Accounts
Additions
Deductions
(In thousands)
Year Ended December 31,
Balance at Beginning of Year
Charged to Earnings
Acquired Properties
Uncollectible Accounts Written-off
Disposed Properties
Balance at End of Year
2017
Allowance for doubtful accounts
11,636
7,207
—
(3,237
)
(443
)
$
15,163
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
109,836
8,540
—
—
(612
)
$
117,764
121,472
15,747
—
(3,237
)
(1,055
)
$
132,927
2016
Allowance for doubtful accounts
13,546
5,093
—
(7,111
)
108
$
11,636
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
101,418
9,682
—
—
(1,264
)
$
109,836
114,964
14,775
—
(7,111
)
(1,156
)
$
121,472
2015
Allowance for doubtful accounts
11,460
10,937
753
(12,977
)
3,373
$
13,546
Straight-line rent receivable allowance
83,461
35,448
—
—
(17,491
)
$
101,418
94,921
46,385
753
(12,977
)
(14,118
)
$
114,964
142
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
For the Years Ended December 31,
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Reconciliation of real estate:
Carrying cost:
Balance at beginning of period
$
23,816,586
$
22,458,032
$
19,241,735
Additions during period:
Acquisitions
702,501
1,380,044
4,063,355
Capital expenditures
452,419
270,664
229,560
Deductions during period:
Foreign currency translation
93,490
(6,252
)
(209,460
)
Other
(1)
(397,158
)
(285,902
)
(867,158
)
Balance at end of period
$
24,667,838
$
23,816,586
$
22,458,032
Accumulated depreciation:
Balance at beginning of period
$
4,190,496
$
3,544,625
$
2,925,508
Additions during period:
Depreciation expense
760,314
732,309
778,419
Dispositions:
Sales and/or transfers to assets held for sale
(176,926
)
(87,431
)
(144,545
)
Foreign currency translation
11,511
993
(14,757
)
Balance at end of period
$
4,785,395
$
4,190,496
$
3,544,625
(1)
Other may include sales, transfers to assets held for sale and impairments.
143
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE III
REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
December 31, 2017
(Dollars in thousands)
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
IRFS AND LTACS
Rehabilitation Hospital of Southern Arizona
Tucson
AZ
$
—
$
770
$
25,589
$
—
$
770
$
25,589
$
26,359
$
4,920
$
21,439
1992
2011
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Brea
Brea
CA
—
3,144
2,611
—
3,144
2,611
5,755
1,467
4,288
1990
1995
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Ontario
Ontario
CA
—
523
2,988
—
523
2,988
3,511
3,076
435
1950
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Diego
San Diego
CA
—
670
11,764
—
670
11,764
12,434
11,739
695
1965
1994
25 years
Kindred Hospital - San Francisco Bay Area
San Leandro
CA
—
2,735
5,870
—
2,735
5,870
8,605
6,142
2,463
1962
1993
25 years
Tustin Rehabilitation Hospital
Tustin
CA
—
2,810
25,248
—
2,810
25,248
28,058
4,948
23,110
1991
2011
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Westminster
Westminster
CA
—
727
7,384
—
727
7,384
8,111
7,562
549
1973
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Denver
Denver
CO
—
896
6,367
—
896
6,367
7,263
6,711
552
1963
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Coral Gables
Coral Gables
FL
—
1,071
5,348
—
1,071
5,348
6,419
5,008
1,411
1956
1992
30 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida Ft. Lauderdale
Fort Lauderdale
FL
—
1,758
14,080
—
1,758
14,080
15,838
13,973
1,865
1969
1989
30 years
Kindred Hospital - North Florida
Green Cove Springs
FL
—
145
4,613
—
145
4,613
4,758
4,642
116
1956
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - South Florida - Hollywood
Hollywood
FL
—
605
5,229
—
605
5,229
5,834
5,234
600
1937
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Bay Area St. Petersburg
St. Petersburg
FL
—
1,401
16,706
—
1,401
16,706
18,107
14,787
3,320
1968
1997
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Central Tampa
Tampa
FL
—
2,732
7,676
—
2,732
7,676
10,408
5,294
5,114
1970
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (North Campus)
Chicago
IL
—
1,583
19,980
—
1,583
19,980
21,563
19,711
1,852
1949
1995
25 years
Kindred - Chicago - Lakeshore
Chicago
IL
—
1,513
9,525
—
1,513
9,525
11,038
9,474
1,564
1995
1976
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Chicago (Northlake Campus)
Northlake
IL
—
850
6,498
—
850
6,498
7,348
6,198
1,150
1960
1991
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Sycamore
Sycamore
IL
—
77
8,549
—
77
8,549
8,626
8,297
329
1949
1993
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Indianapolis
Indianapolis
IN
—
985
3,801
—
985
3,801
4,786
3,566
1,220
1955
1993
30 years
Kindred Hospital - Louisville
Louisville
KY
—
3,041
12,279
—
3,041
12,279
15,320
12,536
2,784
1964
1995
20 years
Kindred Hospital - St. Louis
St. Louis
MO
—
1,126
2,087
—
1,126
2,087
3,213
1,948
1,265
1984
1991
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Las Vegas (Sahara)
Las Vegas
NV
—
1,110
2,177
—
1,110
2,177
3,287
1,448
1,839
1980
1994
40 years
Lovelace Rehabilitation Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
401
17,186
1,415
401
18,601
19,002
1,329
17,673
1989
2015
36 years
Kindred Hospital - Albuquerque
Albuquerque
NM
—
11
4,253
—
11
4,253
4,264
2,961
1,303
1985
1993
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Greensboro
Greensboro
NC
—
1,010
7,586
—
1,010
7,586
8,596
7,686
910
1964
1994
20 years
144
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
University Hospitals Rehabilitation Hospital
Beachwood
OH
—
1,800
16,444
—
1,800
16,444
18,244
2,236
16,008
2013
2013
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Philadelphia
Philadelphia
PA
—
135
5,223
—
135
5,223
5,358
3,514
1,844
1960
1995
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Chattanooga
Chattanooga
TN
—
756
4,415
—
756
4,415
5,171
4,176
995
1975
1993
22 years
Rehabilitation Hospital of Dallas
Dallas
TX
—
2,318
38,702
—
2,318
38,702
41,020
3,591
37,429
2009
2015
35 years
Baylor Institute for Rehabilition - Ft. Worth TX
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,071
16,018
—
2,071
16,018
18,089
1,613
16,476
2008
2015
35 years
Kindred Hospital - Tarrant County (Fort Worth Southwest)
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,342
7,458
—
2,342
7,458
9,800
7,505
2,295
1987
1986
20 years
Rehabilitation Hospital The Vintage
Houston
TX
—
1,838
34,832
—
1,838
34,832
36,670
3,390
33,280
2012
2015
35 years
Kindred Hospital (Houston Northwest)
Houston
TX
—
1,699
6,788
—
1,699
6,788
8,487
5,778
2,709
1986
1985
40 years
Kindred Hospital - Houston
Houston
TX
—
33
7,062
—
33
7,062
7,095
6,667
428
1972
1994
20 years
Kindred Hospital - Mansfield
Mansfield
TX
—
267
2,462
—
267
2,462
2,729
2,015
714
1983
1990
40 years
Select Rehabilitation - San Antonio TX
San Antonio
TX
—
1,859
18,301
—
1,859
18,301
20,160
1,807
18,353
2010
2015
35 years
Kindred Hospital - San Antonio
San Antonio
TX
—
249
11,413
—
249
11,413
11,662
9,533
2,129
1981
1993
30 years
TOTAL FOR IRFS AND LTACS
—
47,061
404,512
1,415
47,061
405,927
452,988
222,482
230,506
SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
Englewood Post Acute and Rehabilitation
Englewood
CO
—
241
2,180
194
241
2,374
2,615
2,015
600
1960
1995
30 years
Brookdale Lisle SNF
Lisle
IL
—
730
9,270
—
730
9,270
10,000
2,863
7,137
1990
2009
35 years
Lopatcong Center
Phillipsburg
NJ
—
1,490
12,336
—
1,490
12,336
13,826
6,031
7,795
1982
2004
30 years
Marietta Convalescent Center
Marietta
OH
—
158
3,266
75
158
3,341
3,499
3,288
211
1972
1993
25 years
The Belvedere
Chester
PA
—
822
7,203
—
822
7,203
8,025
3,511
4,514
1899
2004
30 years
Pennsburg Manor
Pennsburg
PA
—
1,091
7,871
—
1,091
7,871
8,962
3,889
5,073
1982
2004
30 years
Chapel Manor
Philadelphia
PA
—
1,595
13,982
1,358
1,595
15,340
16,935
7,805
9,130
1948
2004
30 years
Wayne Center
Strafford
PA
—
662
6,872
850
662
7,722
8,384
4,148
4,236
1897
2004
30 years
Everett Rehabilitation & Care
Everett
WA
—
2,750
27,337
—
2,750
27,337
30,087
5,456
24,631
1995
2011
35 years
Northwest Continuum Care Center
Longview
WA
—
145
2,563
171
145
2,734
2,879
2,377
502
1955
1992
29 years
Columbia Crest Care & Rehabilitation Center
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
17,439
—
660
17,439
18,099
3,564
14,535
1972
2011
35 years
Lake Ridge Solana Alzheimer's Care Center
Moses Lake
WA
—
660
8,866
—
660
8,866
9,526
1,886
7,640
1988
2011
35 years
Rainier Vista Care Center
Puyallup
WA
—
520
4,780
305
520
5,085
5,605
3,355
2,250
1986
1991
40 years
Logan Center
Logan
WV
—
300
12,959
—
300
12,959
13,259
2,597
10,662
1987
2011
35 years
Ravenswood Healthcare Center
Ravenswood
WV
—
320
12,710
—
320
12,710
13,030
2,556
10,474
1987
2011
35 years
Valley Center
South Charleston
WV
—
750
24,115
—
750
24,115
24,865
4,897
19,968
1987
2011
35 years
White Sulphur
White Sulphur Springs
WV
—
250
13,055
—
250
13,055
13,305
2,641
10,664
1987
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES
—
13,144
186,804
2,953
13,144
189,757
202,901
62,879
140,022
HEALTH SYSTEMS
145
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Lovelace Medical Center Downtown
Albuquerque
NM
—
9,840
156,535
5,319
9,928
161,766
171,694
12,499
159,195
1968
2015
33 years
Lovelace Westside Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
10,107
18,501
(3,873
)
10,107
14,628
24,735
2,879
21,856
1984
2015
20 years
Lovelace Women's Hospital
Albuquerque
NM
—
7,236
183,866
10,317
7,236
194,183
201,419
10,423
190,996
1983
2015
47 years
Roswell Regional Hospital
Roswell
NM
—
2,560
41,164
1,509
2,560
42,673
45,233
2,380
42,853
2007
2015
47 years
Hillcrest Hospital Claremore
Claremore
OK
—
3,623
34,359
(10,268
)
3,623
24,091
27,714
1,716
25,998
1955
2015
40 years
Bailey Medical Center
Owasso
OK
—
4,964
8,969
(1,782
)
4,964
7,187
12,151
799
11,352
2006
2015
32 years
Hillcrest Medical Center
Tulsa
OK
—
28,319
215,199
8,605
28,319
223,804
252,123
16,487
235,636
1928
2015
34 years
Hillcrest Hospital South
Tulsa
OK
—
17,026
100,892
12,243
17,026
113,135
130,161
7,535
122,626
1999
2015
40 years
Baptist St. Anthony's Hospital
Amarillo
TX
—
13,779
358,029
13,713
13,015
372,506
385,521
20,940
364,581
1967
2015
44 years
Spire Hull and East Riding Hospital
Anlaby
UK
—
3,194
81,613
(11,223
)
2,771
70,813
73,584
5,425
68,159
2010
2014
50 years
Spire Fylde Coast Hospital
Blackpool
UK
—
2,446
28,896
(4,148
)
2,122
25,072
27,194
1,949
25,245
1980
2014
50 years
Spire Clare Park Hospital
Farnham
UK
—
6,263
26,119
(4,286
)
5,434
22,662
28,096
1,831
26,265
2009
2014
50 years
TOTAL FOR HEALTH SYSTEMS
—
109,357
1,254,142
16,126
107,105
1,272,520
1,379,625
84,863
1,294,762
BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Brookdale Chandler Ray Road
Chandler
AZ
—
2,000
6,538
—
2,000
6,538
8,538
1,418
7,120
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Springs Mesa
Mesa
AZ
—
2,747
24,918
—
2,747
24,918
27,665
10,793
16,872
1986
2005
35 years
Brookdale East Arbor
Mesa
AZ
—
655
6,998
—
655
6,998
7,653
3,009
4,644
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Oro Valley
Oro Valley
AZ
—
666
6,169
—
666
6,169
6,835
2,653
4,182
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Peoria
Peoria
AZ
—
598
4,872
—
598
4,872
5,470
2,095
3,375
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,748
2,929
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale East Tucson
Tucson
AZ
—
506
4,745
—
506
4,745
5,251
2,040
3,211
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Anaheim
Anaheim
CA
—
2,464
7,908
—
2,464
7,908
10,372
3,148
7,224
1977
2005
35 years
Brookdale Redwood City
Redwood City
CA
—
7,669
66,691
—
7,669
66,691
74,360
29,097
45,263
1988
2005
35 years
Brookdale San Jose
San Jose
CA
—
6,240
66,329
12,838
6,240
79,167
85,407
29,510
55,897
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale San Marcos
San Marcos
CA
—
4,288
36,204
—
4,288
36,204
40,492
15,879
24,613
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Tracy
Tracy
CA
—
1,110
13,296
—
1,110
13,296
14,406
4,974
9,432
1986
2005
35 years
Brookdale Boulder Creek
Boulder
CO
—
1,290
20,683
—
1,290
20,683
21,973
4,217
17,756
1985
2011
35 years
Brookdale Vista Grande
Colorado Springs
CO
—
715
9,279
—
715
9,279
9,994
3,990
6,004
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale El Camino
Pueblo
CO
4,773
840
9,403
—
840
9,403
10,243
4,043
6,200
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Farmington
Farmington
CT
—
3,995
36,310
—
3,995
36,310
40,305
15,722
24,583
1984
2005
35 years
Brookdale South Windsor
South Windsor
CT
—
2,187
12,682
—
2,187
12,682
14,869
5,004
9,865
1999
2004
35 years
Brookdale Chatfield
West Hartford
CT
—
2,493
22,833
22,296
2,493
45,129
47,622
10,806
36,816
1989
2005
35 years
Brookdale Bonita Springs
Bonita Springs
FL
8,599
1,540
10,783
—
1,540
10,783
12,323
4,580
7,743
1989
2005
35 years
Brookdale West Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach
FL
13,178
2,317
16,218
—
2,317
16,218
18,535
6,731
11,804
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Deer Creek AL/MC
Deerfield Beach
FL
—
1,399
9,791
—
1,399
9,791
11,190
4,369
6,821
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Fort Myers The Colony
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,510
7,862
—
1,510
7,862
9,372
1,587
7,785
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Avondale
Jacksonville
FL
—
860
16,745
—
860
16,745
17,605
3,264
14,341
1997
2011
35 years
146
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Brookdale Crown Point
Jacksonville
FL
—
1,300
9,659
—
1,300
9,659
10,959
1,927
9,032
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Jensen Beach
Jensen Beach
FL
11,825
1,831
12,820
—
1,831
12,820
14,651
5,431
9,220
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Ormond Beach West
Ormond Beach
FL
—
1,660
9,738
—
1,660
9,738
11,398
1,957
9,441
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Palm Coast
Palm Coast
FL
—
470
9,187
—
470
9,187
9,657
1,861
7,796
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
633
6,087
—
633
6,087
6,720
2,617
4,103
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Rotonda
Rotonda West
FL
—
1,740
4,331
—
1,740
4,331
6,071
1,043
5,028
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Centre Pointe Boulevard
Tallahassee
FL
4,239
667
6,168
—
667
6,168
6,835
2,652
4,183
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Tavares
Tavares
FL
—
280
15,980
—
280
15,980
16,260
3,129
13,131
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale West Melbourne MC
West Melbourne
FL
6,041
586
5,481
—
586
5,481
6,067
2,357
3,710
2000
2005
35 years
Brookdale West Palm Beach
West Palm Beach
FL
—
3,758
33,072
—
3,758
33,072
36,830
14,400
22,430
1990
2005
35 years
Brookdale Winter Haven MC
Winter Haven
FL
—
232
3,006
—
232
3,006
3,238
1,293
1,945
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Winter Haven AL
Winter Haven
FL
—
438
5,549
—
438
5,549
5,987
2,386
3,601
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Twin Falls
Twin Falls
ID
—
703
6,153
—
703
6,153
6,856
2,646
4,210
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Lake Shore Drive
Chicago
IL
—
11,057
107,517
3,266
11,057
110,783
121,840
47,637
74,203
1990
2005
35 years
Brookdale Lake View
Chicago
IL
—
3,072
26,668
—
3,072
26,668
29,740
11,639
18,101
1950
2005
35 years
Brookdale Des Plaines
Des Plaines
IL
32,000
6,871
60,165
(41
)
6,805
60,190
66,995
26,219
40,776
1993
2005
35 years
Brookdale Hoffman Estates
Hoffman Estates
IL
—
3,886
44,130
—
3,886
44,130
48,016
18,461
29,555
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Lisle IL/AL
Lisle
IL
33,000
7,953
70,400
—
7,953
70,400
78,353
30,621
47,732
1990
2005
35 years
Brookdale Northbrook
Northbrook
IL
—
1,988
39,762
—
1,988
39,762
41,750
16,011
25,739
1999
2004
35 years
Brookdale Hawthorn Lakes IL/AL
Vernon Hills
IL
—
4,439
35,044
—
4,439
35,044
39,483
15,563
23,920
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Hawthorn Lakes AL
Vernon Hills
IL
—
1,147
10,041
—
1,147
10,041
11,188
4,376
6,812
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Evansville
Evansville
IN
3,401
357
3,765
—
357
3,765
4,122
1,619
2,503
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Castleton
Indianapolis
IN
—
1,280
11,515
—
1,280
11,515
12,795
4,994
7,801
1986
2005
35 years
Brookdale Marion AL (IN)
Marion
IN
—
207
3,570
—
207
3,570
3,777
1,535
2,242
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Portage AL
Portage
IN
—
128
3,649
—
128
3,649
3,777
1,569
2,208
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Richmond
Richmond
IN
—
495
4,124
—
495
4,124
4,619
1,773
2,846
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Derby
Derby
KS
—
440
4,422
—
440
4,422
4,862
911
3,951
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Leawood State Line
Leawood
KS
3,463
117
5,127
—
117
5,127
5,244
2,205
3,039
2000
2005
35 years
Brookdale Salina Fairdale
Salina
KS
—
300
5,657
—
300
5,657
5,957
1,166
4,791
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Topeka
Topeka
KS
4,638
370
6,825
—
370
6,825
7,195
2,935
4,260
2000
2005
35 years
Brookdale Wellington
Wellington
KS
—
310
2,434
—
310
2,434
2,744
542
2,202
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Cushing Park
Framingham
MA
—
5,819
33,361
2,430
5,819
35,791
41,610
13,440
28,170
1999
2004
35 years
Brookdale Cape Cod
Hyannis
MA
—
1,277
9,063
—
1,277
9,063
10,340
3,363
6,977
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Quincy Bay
Quincy
MA
—
6,101
57,862
—
6,101
57,862
63,963
24,877
39,086
1986
2005
35 years
Brookdale Davison
Davison
MI
—
160
3,189
2,543
160
5,732
5,892
1,630
4,262
1997
2011
35 years
147
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Brookdale Delta MC
Delta Township
MI
—
730
11,471
—
730
11,471
12,201
2,283
9,918
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Delta AL
Delta Township
MI
—
820
3,313
—
820
3,313
4,133
922
3,211
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Farmington Hills North
Farmington Hills
MI
—
580
10,497
—
580
10,497
11,077
2,338
8,739
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Farmington Hills North II
Farmington Hills
MI
—
700
10,246
—
700
10,246
10,946
2,370
8,576
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Meridian AL
Haslett
MI
—
1,340
6,134
—
1,340
6,134
7,474
1,351
6,123
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Grand Blanc MC
Holly
MI
—
450
12,373
—
450
12,373
12,823
2,469
10,354
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Grand Blanc AL
Holly
MI
—
620
14,627
—
620
14,627
15,247
2,944
12,303
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Northville
Northville
MI
6,820
407
6,068
—
407
6,068
6,475
2,609
3,866
1996
2005
35 years
Brookdale Troy MC
Troy
MI
—
630
17,178
—
630
17,178
17,808
3,394
14,414
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Troy AL
Troy
MI
—
950
12,503
—
950
12,503
13,453
2,634
10,819
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Utica AL
Utica
MI
—
1,142
11,808
—
1,142
11,808
12,950
5,077
7,873
1996
2005
35 years
Brookdale Utica MC
Utica
MI
—
700
8,657
—
700
8,657
9,357
1,837
7,520
1995
2011
35 years
Brookdale Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie
MN
—
301
6,228
—
301
6,228
6,529
2,678
3,851
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Faribault
Faribault
MN
—
530
1,085
—
530
1,085
1,615
275
1,340
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Inver Grove Heights
Inver Grove Heights
MN
2,716
253
2,655
—
253
2,655
2,908
1,142
1,766
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
490
410
—
490
410
900
195
705
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Edina
Minneapolis
MN
15,040
3,621
33,141
22,975
3,621
56,116
59,737
16,010
43,727
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale North Oaks
North Oaks
MN
—
1,057
8,296
—
1,057
8,296
9,353
3,567
5,786
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Plymouth
Plymouth
MN
—
679
8,675
—
679
8,675
9,354
3,730
5,624
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Willmar
Wilmar
MN
—
470
4,833
—
470
4,833
5,303
971
4,332
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Winona
Winona
MN
—
800
1,390
—
800
1,390
2,190
565
1,625
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale West County
Ballwin
MO
—
3,100
35,074
51
3,104
35,121
38,225
3,873
34,352
2012
2014
35 years
Brookdale Evesham
Voorhees Township
NJ
—
3,158
29,909
—
3,158
29,909
33,067
12,861
20,206
1987
2005
35 years
Brookdale Westampton
Westampton
NJ
—
881
4,741
—
881
4,741
5,622
2,039
3,583
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Santa Fe
Santa Fe
NM
—
—
28,178
—
—
28,178
28,178
11,878
16,300
1986
2005
35 years
Brookdale Kenmore
Buffalo
NY
12,716
1,487
15,170
—
1,487
15,170
16,657
6,523
10,134
1995
2005
35 years
Brookdale Clinton IL
Clinton
NY
—
947
7,528
—
947
7,528
8,475
3,237
5,238
1991
2005
35 years
Brookdale Manlius
Manlius
NY
—
890
28,237
—
890
28,237
29,127
5,530
23,597
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Pittsford
Pittsford
NY
—
611
4,066
—
611
4,066
4,677
1,748
2,929
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale East Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
—
1,021
8,333
—
1,021
8,333
9,354
3,583
5,771
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Niskayuna
Schenectady
NY
15,895
1,884
16,103
—
1,884
16,103
17,987
6,924
11,063
1996
2005
35 years
Brookdale Summerfield
Syracuse
NY
—
1,132
11,434
—
1,132
11,434
12,566
4,916
7,650
1991
2005
35 years
Brookdale Williamsville
Williamsville
NY
6,574
839
3,841
—
839
3,841
4,680
1,652
3,028
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Cary
Cary
NC
—
724
6,466
—
724
6,466
7,190
2,780
4,410
1997
2005
35 years
Brookdale Falling Creek
Hickory
NC
—
330
10,981
—
330
10,981
11,311
2,187
9,124
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Winston-Salem
Winston-Salem
NC
—
368
3,497
—
368
3,497
3,865
1,504
2,361
1997
2005
35 years
148
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Brookdale Alliance
Alliance
OH
2,130
392
6,283
—
392
6,283
6,675
2,702
3,973
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Austintown
Austintown
OH
—
151
3,087
—
151
3,087
3,238
1,327
1,911
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Barberton
Barberton
OH
—
440
10,884
—
440
10,884
11,324
2,169
9,155
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Beavercreek
Beavercreek
OH
—
587
5,381
—
587
5,381
5,968
2,314
3,654
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Centennial Park
Clayton
OH
—
630
6,477
—
630
6,477
7,107
1,351
5,756
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Westerville
Columbus
OH
1,768
267
3,600
—
267
3,600
3,867
1,548
2,319
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Greenville AL/MC
Greenville
OH
—
490
4,144
—
490
4,144
4,634
993
3,641
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Marion AL/MC (OH)
Marion
OH
—
620
3,306
—
620
3,306
3,926
769
3,157
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Salem AL (OH)
Salem
OH
—
634
4,659
—
634
4,659
5,293
2,003
3,290
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Springdale
Springdale
OH
—
1,140
9,134
—
1,140
9,134
10,274
1,844
8,430
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Bartlesville South
Bartlesville
OK
—
250
10,529
—
250
10,529
10,779
2,073
8,706
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Bethany
Bethany
OK
—
390
1,499
—
390
1,499
1,889
374
1,515
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Broken Arrow
Broken Arrow
OK
—
940
6,312
6,410
1,873
11,789
13,662
2,436
11,226
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Forest Grove
Forest Grove
OR
—
2,320
9,633
—
2,320
9,633
11,953
2,118
9,835
1994
2011
35 years
Brookdale Mt. Hood
Gresham
OR
—
2,410
9,093
—
2,410
9,093
11,503
2,001
9,502
1988
2011
35 years
Brookdale McMinnville Town Center
McMinnville
OR
1,051
1,230
7,561
—
1,230
7,561
8,791
1,837
6,954
1989
2011
35 years
Brookdale Denton North
Denton
TX
—
1,750
6,712
—
1,750
6,712
8,462
1,372
7,090
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Ennis
Ennis
TX
—
460
3,284
—
460
3,284
3,744
727
3,017
1996
2011
35 years
Brookdale Kerrville
Kerrville
TX
—
460
8,548
—
460
8,548
9,008
1,706
7,302
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Medical Center Whitby
San Antonio
TX
—
1,400
10,051
—
1,400
10,051
11,451
2,031
9,420
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Western Hills
Temple
TX
—
330
5,081
—
330
5,081
5,411
1,079
4,332
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Salem AL (VA)
Salem
VA
—
1,900
16,219
—
1,900
16,219
18,119
6,696
11,423
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Alderwood
Lynnwood
WA
—
1,219
9,573
—
1,219
9,573
10,792
4,117
6,675
1999
2005
35 years
Brookdale Puyallup South
Puyallup
WA
9,268
1,055
8,298
—
1,055
8,298
9,353
3,568
5,785
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Richland
Richland
WA
—
960
23,270
—
960
23,270
24,230
4,758
19,472
1990
2011
35 years
Brookdale Park Place
Spokane
WA
—
1,622
12,895
—
1,622
12,895
14,517
5,719
8,798
1915
2005
35 years
Brookdale Allenmore AL
Tacoma
WA
—
620
16,186
—
620
16,186
16,806
3,209
13,597
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Allenmore - IL
Tacoma
WA
—
1,710
3,326
—
1,710
3,326
5,036
999
4,037
1988
2011
35 years
Brookdale Yakima
Yakima
WA
—
860
15,276
—
860
15,276
16,136
3,120
13,016
1998
2011
35 years
Brookdale Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
551
5,431
2,772
551
8,203
8,754
3,077
5,677
2000
2005
35 years
Brookdale LaCrosse MC
La Crosse
WI
—
621
4,056
1,126
621
5,182
5,803
2,046
3,757
2004
2005
35 years
Brookdale LaCrosse AL
La Crosse
WI
—
644
5,831
2,637
644
8,468
9,112
3,215
5,897
1998
2005
35 years
Brookdale Middleton Century Ave
Middleton
WI
—
360
5,041
—
360
5,041
5,401
1,016
4,385
1997
2011
35 years
Brookdale Onalaska
Onalaska
WI
—
250
4,949
—
250
4,949
5,199
992
4,207
1995
2011
35 years
Brookdale Sun Prairie
Sun Prairie
WI
—
350
1,131
—
350
1,131
1,481
283
1,198
1994
2011
35 years
TOTAL FOR BROOKDALE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
199,135
185,427
1,768,730
79,303
186,298
1,847,162
2,033,460
655,647
1,377,813
SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
149
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Chandler
Chandler
AZ
—
4,344
14,455
807
4,439
15,167
19,606
3,095
16,511
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Scottsdale
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,229
27,575
750
2,255
28,299
30,554
9,100
21,454
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise at River Road
Tucson
AZ
—
2,971
12,399
435
3,000
12,805
15,805
2,421
13,384
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Lynn Valley
Vancouver
BC
—
11,759
37,424
(8,888
)
9,293
31,002
40,295
9,781
30,514
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Vancouver
Vancouver
BC
—
6,649
31,937
996
6,662
32,920
39,582
10,728
28,854
2005
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Victoria
Victoria
BC
—
8,332
29,970
(6,486
)
6,664
25,152
31,816
8,030
23,786
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise at La Costa
Carlsbad
CA
—
4,890
20,590
1,549
5,030
21,999
27,029
7,600
19,429
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Carmichael
Carmichael
CA
—
1,269
14,598
519
1,284
15,102
16,386
2,963
13,423
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Fair Oaks
Fair Oaks
CA
—
1,456
23,679
2,283
2,506
24,912
27,418
8,255
19,163
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,802
24,560
1,515
3,867
26,010
29,877
8,694
21,183
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Canyon Crest
Riverside
CA
—
5,486
19,658
1,935
5,577
21,502
27,079
7,140
19,939
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rocklin
Rocklin
CA
—
1,378
23,565
967
1,411
24,499
25,910
7,971
17,939
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of San Mateo
San Mateo
CA
—
2,682
35,335
1,718
2,705
37,030
39,735
11,782
27,953
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
2,933
34,361
1,186
2,969
35,511
38,480
11,427
27,053
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Sterling Canyon
Valencia
CA
—
3,868
29,293
4,732
4,078
33,815
37,893
11,716
26,177
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westlake Village
Westlake Village
CA
—
4,935
30,722
1,133
5,031
31,759
36,790
10,254
26,536
2004
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Yorba Linda
Yorba Linda
CA
—
1,689
25,240
1,631
1,765
26,795
28,560
8,605
19,955
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Cherry Creek
Denver
CO
—
1,621
28,370
1,475
1,721
29,745
31,466
9,675
21,791
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Pinehurst
Denver
CO
—
1,417
30,885
2,090
1,653
32,739
34,392
11,123
23,269
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Orchard
Littleton
CO
—
1,813
22,183
1,753
1,853
23,896
25,749
7,996
17,753
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westminster
Westminster
CO
—
2,649
16,243
1,696
2,792
17,796
20,588
5,986
14,602
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Stamford
Stamford
CT
—
4,612
28,533
2,128
5,029
30,244
35,273
10,237
25,036
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Jacksonville
Jacksonville
FL
—
2,390
17,671
335
2,420
17,976
20,396
3,541
16,855
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise at Ivey Ridge
Alpharetta
GA
—
1,507
18,516
1,500
1,517
20,006
21,523
6,642
14,881
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Huntcliff Summit I
Atlanta
GA
—
4,232
66,161
17,045
4,185
83,253
87,438
28,310
59,128
1987
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Huntcliff Summit II
Atlanta
GA
—
2,154
17,137
2,291
2,160
19,422
21,582
6,668
14,914
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise at East Cobb
Marietta
GA
—
1,797
23,420
1,723
1,806
25,134
26,940
8,371
18,569
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Barrington
Barrington
IL
—
859
15,085
595
892
15,647
16,539
3,114
13,425
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomingdale
Bloomingdale
IL
—
1,287
38,625
2,056
1,382
40,586
41,968
12,980
28,988
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Buffalo Grove
Buffalo Grove
IL
—
2,154
28,021
1,547
2,339
29,383
31,722
9,652
22,070
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lincoln Park
Chicago
IL
—
3,485
26,687
2,205
3,504
28,873
32,377
8,753
23,624
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Naperville
Naperville
IL
—
1,946
28,538
2,639
2,622
30,501
33,123
10,347
22,776
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Palos Park
Palos Park
IL
—
2,363
42,205
1,278
2,394
43,452
45,846
14,012
31,834
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Park Ridge
Park Ridge
IL
—
5,533
39,557
2,828
5,677
42,241
47,918
13,668
34,250
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Willowbrook
Willowbrook
IL
—
1,454
60,738
2,651
2,080
62,763
64,843
18,572
46,271
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise on Old Meridian
Carmel
IN
—
8,550
31,746
806
8,550
32,552
41,102
6,307
34,795
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Leawood
Leawood
KS
—
651
16,401
906
768
17,190
17,958
3,146
14,812
2006
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Overland Park
Overland Park
KS
—
650
11,015
482
660
11,487
12,147
2,368
9,779
2007
2012
35 years
150
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge
LA
—
1,212
23,547
1,606
1,382
24,983
26,365
8,192
18,173
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Arlington
Arlington
MA
—
86
34,393
1,059
107
35,431
35,538
11,655
23,883
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Norwood
Norwood
MA
—
2,230
30,968
2,053
2,306
32,945
35,251
10,707
24,544
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Columbia
Columbia
MD
—
1,780
23,083
2,923
1,918
25,868
27,786
8,298
19,488
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rockville
Rockville
MD
—
1,039
39,216
2,660
1,066
41,849
42,915
12,915
30,000
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Bloomfield
Bloomfield Hills
MI
—
3,736
27,657
1,981
3,860
29,514
33,374
9,478
23,896
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cascade
Grand Rapids
MI
—
1,273
21,782
609
1,364
22,300
23,664
4,256
19,408
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Northville
Plymouth
MI
—
1,445
26,090
1,365
1,525
27,375
28,900
9,061
19,839
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Rochester
Rochester
MI
—
2,774
38,666
1,284
2,846
39,878
42,724
12,877
29,847
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Troy
Troy
MI
—
1,758
23,727
928
1,860
24,553
26,413
8,168
18,245
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Edina
Edina
MN
—
3,181
24,224
2,915
3,270
27,050
30,320
9,050
21,270
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise on Providence
Charlotte
NC
—
1,976
19,472
2,340
1,988
21,800
23,788
7,128
16,660
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of East Brunswick
East Brunswick
NJ
—
2,784
26,173
2,252
3,030
28,179
31,209
9,680
21,529
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Jackson
Jackson
NJ
—
4,009
15,029
587
4,013
15,612
19,625
3,218
16,407
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Morris Plains
Morris Plains
NJ
17,488
1,492
32,052
2,003
1,569
33,978
35,547
11,078
24,469
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Old Tappan
Old Tappan
NJ
16,241
2,985
36,795
2,032
3,106
38,706
41,812
12,611
29,201
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wall
Wall Township
NJ
—
1,053
19,101
2,022
1,088
21,088
22,176
6,657
15,519
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Wayne
Wayne
NJ
12,901
1,288
24,990
2,475
1,304
27,449
28,753
8,907
19,846
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Westfield
Westfield
NJ
17,095
5,057
23,803
2,119
5,136
25,843
30,979
8,666
22,313
1996
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Woodcliff Lake
Woodcliff Lake
NJ
—
3,493
30,801
1,368
3,537
32,125
35,662
10,744
24,918
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of North Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
4,622
38,087
1,985
4,700
39,994
44,694
13,556
31,138
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Fleetwood
Mount Vernon
NY
—
4,381
28,434
2,393
4,531
30,677
35,208
10,289
24,919
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of New City
New City
NY
—
1,906
27,323
1,764
1,950
29,043
30,993
9,584
21,409
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Smithtown
Smithtown
NY
—
2,853
25,621
2,467
3,040
27,901
30,941
9,703
21,238
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Staten Island
Staten Island
NY
—
7,237
23,910
438
7,288
24,297
31,585
10,408
21,177
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise at North Hills
Raleigh
NC
—
749
37,091
5,417
849
42,408
43,257
13,895
29,362
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Parma
Cleveland
OH
—
695
16,641
1,214
890
17,660
18,550
5,944
12,606
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Cuyahoga Falls
Cuyahoga Falls
OH
—
626
10,239
1,542
783
11,624
12,407
4,064
8,343
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Aurora
Aurora
ON
—
1,570
36,113
(6,664
)
1,274
29,745
31,019
9,530
21,489
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Burlington
Burlington
ON
—
1,173
24,448
832
1,192
25,261
26,453
7,976
18,477
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Unionville
Markham
ON
—
2,322
41,140
(7,621
)
1,908
33,933
35,841
10,824
25,017
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Mississauga
Mississauga
ON
—
3,554
33,631
(6,495
)
2,915
27,775
30,690
8,905
21,785
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Erin Mills
Mississauga
ON
—
1,957
27,020
(5,045
)
1,593
22,339
23,932
7,338
16,594
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Oakville
Oakville
ON
—
2,753
37,489
1,331
2,759
38,814
41,573
12,186
29,387
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond Hill
Richmond Hill
ON
—
2,155
41,254
(7,840
)
1,733
33,836
35,569
10,658
24,911
2002
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Thornhill
Vaughan
ON
—
2,563
57,513
(8,758
)
1,420
49,898
51,318
14,898
36,420
2003
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Windsor
Windsor
ON
—
1,813
20,882
838
1,834
21,699
23,533
6,944
16,589
2001
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Abington
Abington
PA
22
1,838
53,660
5,116
2,015
58,599
60,614
18,706
41,908
1997
2007
35 years
151
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Sunrise of Blue Bell
Blue Bell
PA
—
1,765
23,920
3,101
1,827
26,959
28,786
8,931
19,855
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Exton
Exton
PA
—
1,123
17,765
1,705
1,191
19,402
20,593
6,604
13,989
2000
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Haverford
Haverford
PA
6,893
941
25,872
2,217
983
28,047
29,030
9,017
20,013
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Granite Run
Media
PA
10,609
1,272
31,781
2,344
1,369
34,028
35,397
11,046
24,351
1997
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Lower Makefield
Morrisville
PA
—
3,165
21,337
587
3,167
21,922
25,089
4,324
20,765
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Westtown
West Chester
PA
—
1,547
22,996
2,144
1,570
25,117
26,687
8,576
18,111
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Hillcrest
Dallas
TX
—
2,616
27,680
822
2,626
28,492
31,118
9,253
21,865
2006
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Fort Worth
Fort Worth
TX
—
2,024
18,587
813
2,116
19,308
21,424
3,857
17,567
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Frisco
Frisco
TX
—
2,523
14,547
465
2,535
15,000
17,535
2,649
14,886
2009
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Cinco Ranch
Katy
TX
—
2,512
21,600
1,108
2,580
22,640
25,220
4,382
20,838
2007
2012
35 years
Sunrise at Holladay
Holladay
UT
—
2,542
44,771
843
2,581
45,575
48,156
8,639
39,517
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Sandy
Sandy
UT
—
2,576
22,987
321
2,618
23,266
25,884
7,755
18,129
2007
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Alexandria
Alexandria
VA
—
88
14,811
2,260
240
16,919
17,159
6,079
11,080
1998
2007
35 years
Sunrise of Richmond
Richmond
VA
—
1,120
17,446
1,205
1,164
18,607
19,771
6,495
13,276
1999
2007
35 years
Sunrise at Bon Air
Richmond
VA
—
2,047
22,079
664
2,032
22,758
24,790
4,504
20,286
2008
2012
35 years
Sunrise of Springfield
Springfield
VA
7,893
4,440
18,834
2,635
4,536
21,373
25,909
7,193
18,716
1997
2007
35 years
TOTAL FOR SUNRISE SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
111,090
245,515
2,532,176
99,539
246,623
2,630,607
2,877,230
819,088
2,058,142
ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Arbour Lake
Calgary
AB
—
2,512
39,188
(2,157
)
2,332
37,211
39,543
4,396
35,147
2003
2014
35 years
Canyon Meadows
Calgary
AB
—
1,617
30,803
(1,557
)
1,494
29,369
30,863
3,652
27,211
1995
2014
35 years
Churchill Manor
Edmonton
AB
—
2,865
30,482
(1,777
)
2,647
28,923
31,570
3,622
27,948
1999
2014
35 years
The View at Lethbridge
Lethbridge
AB
—
2,503
24,770
(1,545
)
2,313
23,415
25,728
3,153
22,575
2007
2014
35 years
Victoria Park
Red Deer
AB
—
1,188
22,554
(869
)
1,098
21,775
22,873
2,966
19,907
1999
2014
35 years
Ironwood Estates
St. Albert
AB
—
3,639
22,519
(1,112
)
3,377
21,669
25,046
2,925
22,121
1998
2014
35 years
Atria Regency
Mobile
AL
—
950
11,897
1,387
981
13,253
14,234
3,690
10,544
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Chandler Villas
Chandler
AZ
—
3,650
8,450
1,580
3,721
9,959
13,680
3,554
10,126
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Sierra Pointe
Scottsdale
AZ
—
10,930
65,372
3,269
10,969
68,602
79,571
8,182
71,389
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Campana del Rio
Tucson
AZ
—
5,861
37,284
2,254
5,972
39,427
45,399
10,250
35,149
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Valley Manor
Tucson
AZ
—
1,709
60
819
1,768
820
2,588
417
2,171
1963
2011
35 years
Atria Bell Court Gardens
Tucson
AZ
—
3,010
30,969
1,969
3,060
32,888
35,948
7,677
28,271
1964
2011
35 years
Longlake Chateau
Nanaimo
BC
—
1,874
22,910
(1,018
)
1,738
22,028
23,766
3,011
20,755
1990
2014
35 years
Prince George Chateau
Prince George
BC
—
2,066
22,761
(1,449
)
1,909
21,469
23,378
2,909
20,469
2005
2014
35 years
The Victorian
Victoria
BC
—
3,419
16,351
(620
)
3,184
15,966
19,150
2,266
16,884
1988
2014
35 years
The Victorian at McKenzie
Victoria
BC
—
4,801
25,712
(1,529
)
4,440
24,544
28,984
3,231
25,753
2003
2014
35 years
Atria Burlingame
Burlingame
CA
—
2,494
12,373
1,522
2,523
13,866
16,389
3,606
12,783
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Las Posas
Camarillo
CA
—
4,500
28,436
1,206
4,518
29,624
34,142
6,855
27,287
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Carmichael Oaks
Carmichael
CA
18,015
2,118
49,694
2,192
2,147
51,857
54,004
8,944
45,060
1992
2013
35 years
Atria El Camino Gardens
Carmichael
CA
—
6,930
32,318
14,347
7,210
46,385
53,595
10,402
43,193
1984
2011
35 years
152
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Covina
Covina
CA
—
170
4,131
693
250
4,744
4,994
1,509
3,485
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Daly City
Daly City
CA
—
3,090
13,448
1,113
3,102
14,549
17,651
3,660
13,991
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Covell Gardens
Davis
CA
—
2,163
39,657
11,064
2,382
50,502
52,884
13,083
39,801
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Encinitas
Encinitas
CA
—
5,880
9,212
1,785
5,942
10,935
16,877
2,917
13,960
1984
2011
35 years
Atria North Escondido
Escondido
CA
—
1,196
7,155
469
1,207
7,613
8,820
1,261
7,559
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Grass Valley
Grass Valley
CA
11,218
1,965
28,414
825
2,016
29,188
31,204
5,232
25,972
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Golden Creek
Irvine
CA
—
6,900
23,544
1,385
6,930
24,899
31,829
6,383
25,446
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Lafayette
Lafayette
CA
18,916
5,679
56,922
1,137
5,886
57,852
63,738
9,403
54,335
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Del Sol
Mission Viejo
CA
—
3,500
12,458
8,590
3,781
20,767
24,548
5,623
18,925
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Newport Plaza
Newport Beach
CA
—
4,534
32,881
—
4,534
32,881
37,415
—
37,415
1989
2017
35 years
Atria Tamalpais Creek
Novato
CA
—
5,812
24,703
876
5,831
25,560
31,391
6,040
25,351
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Pacific Palisades
Pacific Palisades
CA
—
4,458
17,064
1,705
4,489
18,738
23,227
6,607
16,620
2001
2007
35 years
Atria Palm Desert
Palm Desert
CA
—
2,887
9,843
1,239
3,115
10,854
13,969
4,663
9,306
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Hacienda
Palm Desert
CA
—
6,680
85,900
3,291
6,873
88,998
95,871
19,449
76,422
1989
2011
35 years
Atria Paradise
Paradise
CA
—
2,265
28,262
1,090
2,309
29,308
31,617
5,184
26,433
1999
2013
35 years
Atria Del Rey
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
3,290
17,427
5,470
3,464
22,723
26,187
7,237
18,950
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Rocklin
Rocklin
CA
19,221
4,427
52,064
872
4,439
52,924
57,363
5,339
52,024
2001
2015
35 years
Atria La Jolla
San Diego
CA
—
8,210
46,289
—
8,210
46,289
54,499
—
54,499
1984
2017
35 years
Atria Penasquitos
San Diego
CA
—
2,649
23,993
—
2,649
23,993
26,642
—
26,642
1991
2017
35 years
Atria Collwood
San Diego
CA
—
290
10,650
1,174
338
11,776
12,114
3,218
8,896
1976
2011
35 years
Atria Rancho Park
San Dimas
CA
—
4,066
14,306
1,628
4,613
15,387
20,000
4,566
15,434
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Chateau Gardens
San Jose
CA
—
39
487
644
49
1,121
1,170
1,159
11
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Glen
San Jose
CA
—
8,521
43,168
2,931
8,590
46,030
54,620
9,642
44,978
1976
2011
35 years
Atria San Juan
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
5,110
29,436
8,373
5,318
37,601
42,919
11,978
30,941
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Hillsdale
San Mateo
CA
—
5,240
15,956
4,441
5,253
20,384
25,637
4,146
21,491
1986
2011
35 years
Atria Santa Clarita
Santa Clarita
CA
—
3,880
38,366
932
3,890
39,288
43,178
4,024
39,154
2001
2015
35 years
Atria Bayside Landing
Stockton
CA
—
—
467
660
—
1,127
1,127
963
164
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sunnyvale
Sunnyvale
CA
—
6,120
30,068
4,920
6,228
34,880
41,108
8,508
32,600
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Tarzana
Tarzana
CA
—
960
47,547
889
974
48,422
49,396
7,718
41,678
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Park of Vintage Hills
Temecula
CA
—
4,674
44,341
2,068
4,879
46,204
51,083
8,308
42,775
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Park of Grand Oaks
Thousand Oaks
CA
21,965
5,994
50,309
916
6,055
51,164
57,219
8,886
48,333
2002
2013
35 years
Atria Hillcrest
Thousand Oaks
CA
—
6,020
25,635
10,103
6,624
35,134
41,758
11,103
30,655
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Walnut Creek
Walnut Creek
CA
—
6,910
15,797
16,728
7,626
31,809
39,435
9,916
29,519
1978
2011
35 years
Atria Valley View
Walnut Creek
CA
—
7,139
53,914
2,554
7,175
56,432
63,607
19,157
44,450
1977
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Applewood
Lakewood
CO
—
3,656
48,657
419
3,686
49,046
52,732
8,747
43,985
2008
2013
35 years
Atria Inn at Lakewood
Lakewood
CO
—
6,281
50,095
1,593
6,378
51,591
57,969
11,172
46,797
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Longmont
Longmont
CO
—
2,807
24,877
994
2,834
25,844
28,678
5,139
23,539
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Darien
Darien
CT
—
653
37,587
11,428
1,156
48,512
49,668
10,803
38,865
1997
2011
35 years
153
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Larson Place
Hamden
CT
—
1,850
16,098
1,778
1,885
17,841
19,726
4,628
15,098
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Greenridge Place
Rocky Hill
CT
—
2,170
32,553
2,352
2,388
34,687
37,075
7,751
29,324
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stamford
Stamford
CT
—
1,200
62,432
12,331
1,378
74,585
75,963
15,259
60,704
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Stratford
Stratford
CT
—
3,210
27,865
1,828
3,210
29,693
32,903
7,264
25,639
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Crossroads Place
Waterford
CT
—
2,401
36,495
7,789
2,577
44,108
46,685
10,926
35,759
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Hamilton Heights
West Hartford
CT
—
3,120
14,674
3,463
3,158
18,099
21,257
5,434
15,823
1904
2011
35 years
Atria Windsor Woods
Hudson
FL
—
1,610
32,432
2,048
1,687
34,403
36,090
8,650
27,440
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Baypoint Village
Hudson
FL
—
2,083
28,841
8,612
2,350
37,186
39,536
9,753
29,783
1986
2011
35 years
Atria Park of San Pablo
Jacksonville
FL
5,388
1,620
14,920
921
1,660
15,801
17,461
3,764
13,697
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Park of St. Joseph's
Jupiter
FL
15,588
5,520
30,720
1,142
5,557
31,825
37,382
5,675
31,707
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Lady Lake
Lady Lake
FL
—
3,752
26,265
588
3,766
26,839
30,605
2,708
27,897
2010
2015
35 years
Atria Park of Lake Forest
Sanford
FL
—
3,589
32,586
4,027
3,886
36,316
40,202
8,356
31,846
2002
2011
35 years
Atria Evergreen Woods
Spring Hill
FL
—
2,370
28,371
3,510
2,533
31,718
34,251
8,911
25,340
1981
2011
35 years
Atria North Point
Alpharetta
GA
40,221
4,830
78,318
1,700
4,856
79,992
84,848
10,973
73,875
2007
2014
35 years
Atria Buckhead
Atlanta
GA
—
3,660
5,274
969
3,688
6,215
9,903
2,091
7,812
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Mableton
Austell
GA
—
1,911
18,879
479
1,946
19,323
21,269
3,447
17,822
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Johnson Ferry
Marietta
GA
—
990
6,453
657
995
7,105
8,100
1,895
6,205
1995
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Tucker
Tucker
GA
—
1,103
20,679
605
1,120
21,267
22,387
3,756
18,631
2000
2013
35 years
Atria Park of Glen Ellyn
Glen Ellyn
IL
—
2,455
34,064
3,060
2,634
36,945
39,579
12,230
27,349
2000
2007
35 years
Atria Newburgh
Newburgh
IN
—
1,150
22,880
748
1,150
23,628
24,778
5,335
19,443
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone East
Topeka
KS
—
1,150
20,544
1,018
1,215
21,497
22,712
5,306
17,406
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Hearthstone West
Topeka
KS
—
1,230
28,379
2,322
1,245
30,686
31,931
7,885
24,046
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Highland Crossing
Covington
KY
—
1,677
14,393
1,440
1,689
15,821
17,510
4,554
12,956
1988
2011
35 years
Atria Summit Hills
Crestview Hills
KY
—
1,780
15,769
884
1,789
16,644
18,433
4,255
14,178
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Elizabethtown
Elizabethtown
KY
—
850
12,510
658
869
13,149
14,018
3,175
10,843
1996
2011
35 years
Atria St. Matthews
Louisville
KY
—
939
9,274
1,147
953
10,407
11,360
3,347
8,013
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Stony Brook
Louisville
KY
—
1,860
17,561
1,177
1,953
18,645
20,598
4,581
16,017
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Springdale
Louisville
KY
—
1,410
16,702
1,255
1,410
17,957
19,367
4,463
14,904
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Marland Place
Andover
MA
—
1,831
34,592
19,314
1,996
53,741
55,737
14,791
40,946
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Longmeadow Place
Burlington
MA
—
5,310
58,021
1,483
5,383
59,431
64,814
12,734
52,080
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Fairhaven
Fairhaven
MA
—
1,100
16,093
861
1,148
16,906
18,054
3,868
14,186
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbriar Place
Falmouth
MA
15,940
4,630
27,314
5,566
6,433
31,077
37,510
6,341
31,169
2013
2013
35 years
Atria Woodbriar Park
Falmouth
MA
—
1,970
43,693
21,194
2,599
64,258
66,857
11,987
54,870
1975
2011
35 years
Atria Draper Place
Hopedale
MA
—
1,140
17,794
1,533
1,234
19,233
20,467
4,575
15,892
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Merrimack Place
Newburyport
MA
—
2,774
40,645
1,896
2,822
42,493
45,315
9,006
36,309
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Marina Place
Quincy
MA
—
2,590
33,899
1,589
2,755
35,323
38,078
8,150
29,928
1999
2011
35 years
Riverheights Terrace
Brandon
MB
—
799
27,708
(1,193
)
739
26,575
27,314
3,385
23,929
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Meadow
Winnipeg
MB
—
3,047
17,821
(431
)
2,817
17,620
20,437
2,685
17,752
2000
2014
35 years
The Westhaven
Winnipeg
MB
—
871
23,162
(1,222
)
816
21,995
22,811
2,959
19,852
1988
2014
35 years
154
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Manresa
Annapolis
MD
—
4,193
19,000
1,822
4,465
20,550
25,015
5,052
19,963
1920
2011
35 years
Atria Salisbury
Salisbury
MD
—
1,940
24,500
780
1,959
25,261
27,220
5,557
21,663
1995
2011
35 years
Atria Kennebunk
Kennebunk
ME
—
1,090
23,496
1,127
1,117
24,596
25,713
5,806
19,907
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Park of Ann Arbor
Ann Arbor
MI
—
1,703
15,857
2,055
1,806
17,809
19,615
6,437
13,178
2001
2007
35 years
Atria Kinghaven
Riverview
MI
13,029
1,440
26,260
1,911
1,598
28,013
29,611
6,994
22,617
1987
2011
35 years
Ste. Anne's Court
Fredericton
NB
—
1,221
29,626
(1,214
)
1,131
28,502
29,633
3,580
26,053
2002
2014
35 years
Chateau de Champlain
St. John
NB
—
796
24,577
(854
)
747
23,772
24,519
3,174
21,345
2002
2014
35 years
Atria MerryWood
Charlotte
NC
—
1,678
36,892
2,487
1,724
39,333
41,057
9,919
31,138
1991
2011
35 years
Atria Southpoint Walk
Durham
NC
15,921
2,130
25,920
912
2,135
26,827
28,962
4,921
24,041
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Oakridge
Raleigh
NC
14,768
1,482
28,838
1,017
1,519
29,818
31,337
5,435
25,902
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Cranford
Cranford
NJ
25,067
8,260
61,411
4,730
8,382
66,019
74,401
15,581
58,820
1993
2011
35 years
Atria Tinton Falls
Tinton Falls
NJ
—
6,580
13,258
1,257
6,756
14,339
21,095
4,324
16,771
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Sunlake
Las Vegas
NV
—
7
732
958
15
1,682
1,697
1,664
33
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Sutton
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
863
1,130
48
1,945
1,993
1,697
296
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Seville
Las Vegas
NV
—
—
796
1,452
11
2,237
2,248
1,427
821
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Summit Ridge
Reno
NV
—
4
407
546
20
937
957
802
155
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Shaker
Albany
NY
—
1,520
29,667
1,217
1,626
30,778
32,404
7,071
25,333
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Crossgate
Albany
NY
—
1,080
20,599
1,089
1,100
21,668
22,768
5,221
17,547
1980
2011
35 years
Atria Woodlands
Ardsley
NY
45,490
7,660
65,581
2,397
7,718
67,920
75,638
15,345
60,293
2005
2011
35 years
Atria Bay Shore
Bay Shore
NY
15,275
4,440
31,983
1,853
4,448
33,828
38,276
7,914
30,362
1900
2011
35 years
Atria Briarcliff Manor
Briarcliff Manor
NY
—
6,560
33,885
2,003
6,725
35,723
42,448
8,673
33,775
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Riverdale
Bronx
NY
—
1,020
24,149
14,480
1,069
38,580
39,649
10,524
29,125
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Delmar Place
Delmar
NY
—
1,201
24,850
719
1,219
25,551
26,770
3,733
23,037
2004
2013
35 years
Atria East Northport
East Northport
NY
—
9,960
34,467
19,448
10,211
53,664
63,875
11,420
52,455
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Glen Cove
Glen Cove
NY
—
2,035
25,190
1,123
2,057
26,291
28,348
11,551
16,797
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Great Neck
Great Neck
NY
—
3,390
54,051
19,217
3,390
73,268
76,658
11,785
64,873
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cutter Mill
Great Neck
NY
—
2,750
47,919
2,867
2,761
50,775
53,536
10,914
42,622
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Huntington
Huntington Station
NY
—
8,190
1,169
2,491
8,232
3,618
11,850
2,056
9,794
1987
2011
35 years
Atria Hertlin Place
Lake Ronkonkoma
NY
—
7,886
16,391
1,944
7,886
18,335
26,221
3,768
22,453
2002
2012
35 years
Atria Lynbrook
Lynbrook
NY
—
3,145
5,489
1,187
3,176
6,645
9,821
2,344
7,477
1996
2011
35 years
Atria Tanglewood
Lynbrook
NY
24,095
4,120
37,348
935
4,145
38,258
42,403
8,408
33,995
2005
2011
35 years
Atria West 86
New York
NY
—
80
73,685
5,856
167
79,454
79,621
18,543
61,078
1998
2011
35 years
Atria on the Hudson
Ossining
NY
—
8,123
63,089
4,114
8,191
67,135
75,326
16,163
59,163
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Penfield
Penfield
NY
—
620
22,036
967
723
22,900
23,623
5,383
18,240
1972
2011
35 years
Atria Plainview
Plainview
NY
—
2,480
16,060
1,590
2,630
17,500
20,130
4,446
15,684
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Rye Brook
Port Chester
NY
41,514
9,660
74,936
1,944
9,726
76,814
86,540
16,836
69,704
2004
2011
35 years
Atria Kew Gardens
Queens
NY
—
3,051
66,013
8,272
3,079
74,257
77,336
16,232
61,104
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Hills
Queens
NY
—
2,050
16,680
1,244
2,074
17,900
19,974
4,360
15,614
2001
2011
35 years
155
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Greece
Rochester
NY
—
410
14,967
1,041
639
15,779
16,418
3,893
12,525
1970
2011
35 years
Atria on Roslyn Harbor
Roslyn
NY
65,000
12,909
72,720
2,231
12,974
74,886
87,860
16,287
71,573
2006
2011
35 years
Atria Guilderland
Slingerlands
NY
—
1,170
22,414
601
1,171
23,014
24,185
5,225
18,960
1950
2011
35 years
Atria South Setauket
South Setauket
NY
—
8,450
14,534
1,514
8,832
15,666
24,498
5,403
19,095
1967
2011
35 years
The Court at Brooklin
Brooklin
ON
—
2,515
35,602
(1,674
)
2,346
34,097
36,443
4,141
32,302
2004
2014
35 years
Burlington Gardens
Burlington
ON
—
7,560
50,744
(3,614
)
7,009
47,681
54,690
5,602
49,088
2008
2014
35 years
The Court at Rushdale
Hamilton
ON
—
1,799
34,633
(1,379
)
1,663
33,390
35,053
4,040
31,013
2004
2014
35 years
Kingsdale Chateau
Kingston
ON
—
2,221
36,272
(1,383
)
2,059
35,051
37,110
4,247
32,863
2000
2014
35 years
Crystal View Lodge
Nepean
ON
—
1,587
37,243
(1,274
)
1,657
35,899
37,556
4,354
33,202
2000
2014
35 years
The Court at Barrhaven
Nepean
ON
—
1,778
33,922
(1,218
)
1,667
32,815
34,482
4,110
30,372
2004
2014
35 years
Stamford Estates
Niagara Falls
ON
—
1,414
29,439
(1,744
)
1,307
27,802
29,109
3,525
25,584
2005
2014
35 years
Sherbrooke Heights
Peterborough
ON
—
2,485
33,747
(1,280
)
2,300
32,652
34,952
4,122
30,830
2001
2014
35 years
Anchor Pointe
St. Catharines
ON
—
8,214
24,056
(1,790
)
7,593
22,887
30,480
3,259
27,221
2000
2014
35 years
The Court at Pringle Creek
Whitby
ON
—
2,965
39,206
(2,173
)
2,796
37,202
39,998
4,599
35,399
2002
2014
35 years
Atria Bethlehem
Bethlehem
PA
—
2,479
22,870
872
2,492
23,729
26,221
5,905
20,316
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Center City
Philadelphia
PA
—
3,460
18,291
15,109
3,475
33,385
36,860
5,427
31,433
1964
2011
35 years
Atria Woodbridge Place
Phoenixville
PA
—
1,510
19,130
990
1,526
20,104
21,630
4,941
16,689
1996
2011
35 years
Atria South Hills
Pittsburgh
PA
—
880
10,884
764
913
11,615
12,528
3,221
9,307
1998
2011
35 years
La Residence Steger
Saint-Laurent
QC
—
1,995
10,926
425
1,884
11,462
13,346
1,912
11,434
1999
2014
35 years
Atria Bay Spring Village
Barrington
RI
—
2,000
33,400
2,613
2,080
35,933
38,013
9,137
28,876
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Harborhill
East Greenwich
RI
—
2,089
21,702
1,519
2,179
23,131
25,310
5,562
19,748
1835
2011
35 years
Atria Lincoln Place
Lincoln
RI
—
1,440
12,686
1,027
1,475
13,678
15,153
3,755
11,398
2000
2011
35 years
Atria Aquidneck Place
Portsmouth
RI
—
2,810
31,623
865
2,814
32,484
35,298
7,007
28,291
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Forest Lake
Columbia
SC
—
670
13,946
837
684
14,769
15,453
3,451
12,002
1999
2011
35 years
Primrose Chateau
Saskatoon
SK
—
2,611
32,729
(1,634
)
2,484
31,222
33,706
3,885
29,821
1996
2014
35 years
Mulberry Estates
Moose Jaw
SK
—
2,173
31,791
(1,381
)
2,103
30,480
32,583
3,829
28,754
2003
2014
35 years
Queen Victoria Estates
Regina
SK
—
3,018
34,109
(1,596
)
2,789
32,742
35,531
4,019
31,512
2000
2014
35 years
Atria Weston Place
Knoxville
TN
9,158
793
7,961
1,113
967
8,900
9,867
2,482
7,385
1993
2011
35 years
Atria at the Arboretum
Austin
TX
—
8,280
61,764
923
8,342
62,625
70,967
11,628
59,339
2009
2012
35 years
Atria Carrollton
Carrollton
TX
6,259
360
20,465
1,270
370
21,725
22,095
5,247
16,848
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Grapevine
Grapevine
TX
—
2,070
23,104
789
2,080
23,883
25,963
5,523
20,440
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Westchase
Houston
TX
—
2,318
22,278
1,075
2,322
23,349
25,671
5,578
20,093
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Cinco Ranch
Katy
TX
—
3,171
73,287
967
3,176
74,249
77,425
6,972
70,453
2010
2015
35 years
Atria Kingwood
Kingwood
TX
—
1,170
4,518
697
1,192
5,193
6,385
1,644
4,741
1998
2011
35 years
Atria at Hometown
North Richland Hills
TX
—
1,932
30,382
1,294
1,963
31,645
33,608
5,945
27,663
2007
2013
35 years
Atria Canyon Creek
Plano
TX
—
3,110
45,999
1,360
3,148
47,321
50,469
8,528
41,941
2009
2013
35 years
Atria Richardson
Richardson
TX
—
1,590
23,662
1,178
1,600
24,830
26,430
5,570
20,860
1998
2011
35 years
Atria Cypresswood
Spring
TX
—
880
9,192
(2,884
)
897
6,291
7,188
2,466
4,722
1996
2011
35 years
156
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Atria Sugar Land
Sugar Land
TX
—
970
17,542
885
980
18,417
19,397
4,338
15,059
1999
2011
35 years
Atria Copeland
Tyler
TX
—
1,879
17,901
874
1,888
18,766
20,654
4,613
16,041
1997
2011
35 years
Atria Willow Park
Tyler
TX
—
920
31,271
1,169
982
32,378
33,360
7,815
25,545
1985
2011
35 years
Atria Virginia Beach
Virginia Beach
VA
—
1,749
33,004
710
1,754
33,709
35,463
7,919
27,544
1998
2011
35 years
Amberwood
Port Richey
FL
—
1,320
—
—
1,320
—
1,320
—
1,320
N/A
2011
N/A
Atria Development & Construction Fees
—
—
428
—
—
428
428
—
428
CIP
CIP
CIP
TOTAL FOR ATRIA SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
442,048
548,972
5,010,620
387,770
558,443
5,388,919
5,947,362
1,111,490
4,835,872
OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
Elmcroft of Grayson Valley
Birmingham
AL
—
1,040
19,145
495
1,046
19,634
20,680
4,174
16,506
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Byrd Springs
Hunstville
AL
—
1,720
11,270
468
1,723
11,735
13,458
2,733
10,725
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Heritage Woods
Mobile
AL
—
1,020
10,241
489
1,020
10,730
11,750
2,526
9,224
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Halcyon
Montgomery
AL
—
220
5,476
16
220
5,492
5,712
1,748
3,964
1999
2006
35 years
Rosewood Manor
Scottsboro
AL
—
680
4,038
—
680
4,038
4,718
847
3,871
1998
2011
35 years
West Shores
Hot Springs
AR
—
1,326
10,904
1,200
1,326
12,104
13,430
3,928
9,502
1988
2005
35 years
Elmcroft of Maumelle
Maumelle
AR
—
1,252
7,601
22
1,252
7,623
8,875
2,426
6,449
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Mountain Home
Mountain Home
AR
—
204
8,971
5
204
8,976
9,180
2,863
6,317
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sherwood
Sherwood
AR
—
1,320
5,693
24
1,320
5,717
7,037
1,817
5,220
1997
2006
35 years
Chandler Memory Care Community
Chandler
AZ
—
2,910
8,882
184
3,094
8,882
11,976
1,891
10,085
2012
2012
35 years
Silver Creek Inn Memory Care Community
Gilbert
AZ
—
890
5,918
—
890
5,918
6,808
1,150
5,658
2012
2012
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Green Valley
Green Valley
AZ
—
1,227
13,977
—
1,227
13,977
15,204
1,442
13,762
1998
2014
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lake Havasu City
Lake Havasu
AZ
—
594
14,792
—
594
14,792
15,386
1,517
13,869
1999
2014
35 years
Lakeview Terrace
Lake Havasu City
AZ
—
706
7,810
96
706
7,906
8,612
840
7,772
2009
2015
35 years
Arbor Rose
Mesa
AZ
—
1,100
11,880
2,434
1,100
14,314
15,414
4,176
11,238
1999
2011
35 years
The Stratford
Phoenix
AZ
—
1,931
33,576
—
1,931
33,576
35,507
3,453
32,054
2001
2014
35 years
Amber Creek Inn Memory Care
Scottsdale
AZ
—
2,310
6,322
677
2,185
7,124
9,309
528
8,781
1986
2011
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Sierra Vista
Sierra Vista
AZ
—
295
13,224
—
295
13,224
13,519
1,353
12,166
1999
2014
35 years
The Woodmark at Sun City
Sun City
AZ
—
964
35,093
531
1,003
35,585
36,588
3,329
33,259
2000
2015
35 years
Rock Creek Memory Care Community
Surprise
AZ
10,228
826
16,353
—
826
16,353
17,179
45
17,134
2017
2017
35 years
Elmcroft of Tempe
Tempe
AZ
—
1,090
12,942
855
1,090
13,797
14,887
3,143
11,744
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of River Centre
Tucson
AZ
—
1,940
5,195
462
1,940
5,657
7,597
1,531
6,066
1999
2011
35 years
Sierra Ridge Memory Care
Auburn
CA
—
681
6,071
—
681
6,071
6,752
643
6,109
2011
2014
35 years
Careage Banning
Banning
CA
—
2,970
16,037
—
2,970
16,037
19,007
3,567
15,440
2004
2011
35 years
Las Villas Del Carlsbad
Carlsbad
CA
—
1,760
30,469
3
1,760
30,472
32,232
9,721
22,511
1987
2006
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Chico
Chico
CA
—
1,069
14,929
—
1,069
14,929
15,998
1,537
14,461
1998
2014
35 years
157
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Villa Bonita
Chula Vista
CA
—
1,610
9,169
—
1,610
9,169
10,779
2,137
8,642
1989
2011
35 years
The Meadows Senior Living
Elk Grove
CA
—
1,308
19,667
—
1,308
19,667
20,975
2,047
18,928
2003
2014
35 years
Las Villas Del Norte
Escondido
CA
—
2,791
32,632
17
2,791
32,649
35,440
10,412
25,028
1986
2006
35 years
Alder Bay Assisted Living
Eureka
CA
—
1,170
5,228
(70
)
1,170
5,158
6,328
1,215
5,113
1997
2011
35 years
Cedarbrook
Fresno
CA
—
1,652
12,613
—
1,652
12,613
14,265
353
13,912
2014
2017
35 years
Elmcroft of La Mesa
La Mesa
CA
—
2,431
6,101
—
2,431
6,101
8,532
1,946
6,586
1997
2006
35 years
Grossmont Gardens
La Mesa
CA
—
9,104
59,349
71
9,104
59,420
68,524
18,939
49,585
1964
2006
35 years
Palms, The
La Mirada
CA
—
2,700
43,919
—
2,700
43,919
46,619
6,243
40,376
1990
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Lancaster
Lancaster
CA
—
718
10,459
—
718
10,459
11,177
1,077
10,100
1999
2014
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Marysville
Marysville
CA
—
741
7,467
—
741
7,467
8,208
772
7,436
1999
2014
35 years
Mountview Retirement Residence
Montrose
CA
—
1,089
15,449
77
1,089
15,526
16,615
4,933
11,682
1974
2006
35 years
Redwood Retirement
Napa
CA
—
2,798
12,639
—
2,798
12,639
15,437
1,836
13,601
1986
2013
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Oroville
Oroville
CA
—
638
8,079
—
638
8,079
8,717
833
7,884
1999
2014
35 years
Valencia Commons
Rancho Cucamonga
CA
—
1,439
36,363
—
1,439
36,363
37,802
5,154
32,648
2002
2013
35 years
Mission Hills
Rancho Mirage
CA
—
6,800
3,637
—
6,800
3,637
10,437
1,297
9,140
1999
2011
35 years
Shasta Estates
Redding
CA
—
1,180
23,463
—
1,180
23,463
24,643
3,330
21,313
2009
2013
35 years
The Vistas
Redding
CA
—
1,290
22,033
—
1,290
22,033
23,323
4,555
18,768
2007
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Point Loma
San Diego
CA
—
2,117
6,865
—
2,117
6,865
8,982
2,190
6,792
1999
2006
35 years
Regency of Evergreen Valley
San Jose
CA
—
2,700
7,994
—
2,700
7,994
10,694
2,222
8,472
1998
2011
35 years
Villa del Obispo
San Juan Capistrano
CA
—
2,660
9,560
331
2,660
9,891
12,551
2,140
10,411
1985
2011
35 years
Villa Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara
CA
—
1,219
12,426
3,645
1,219
16,071
17,290
4,468
12,822
1977
2005
35 years
Skyline Place Senior Living
Sonora
CA
—
1,815
28,472
—
1,815
28,472
30,287
2,977
27,310
1996
2014
35 years
Oak Terrace Memory Care
Soulsbyville
CA
—
1,146
5,275
—
1,146
5,275
6,421
568
5,853
1999
2014
35 years
Eagle Lake Village
Susanville
CA
—
1,165
6,719
—
1,165
6,719
7,884
1,199
6,685
2006
2012
35 years
Bonaventure, The
Ventura
CA
—
5,294
32,747
—
5,294
32,747
38,041
4,719
33,322
2005
2013
35 years
Sterling Inn
Victorville
CA
12,558
733
18,539
—
733
18,539
19,272
499
18,773
1992
2017
35 years
Sterling Commons
Victorville
CA
5,850
768
13,124
—
768
13,124
13,892
355
13,537
1994
2017
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Visalia
Visalia
CA
—
1,300
8,378
—
1,300
8,378
9,678
873
8,805
1998
2014
35 years
Vista Village
Vista
CA
—
1,630
5,640
61
1,630
5,701
7,331
1,454
5,877
1980
2011
35 years
Rancho Vista
Vista
CA
—
6,730
21,828
42
6,730
21,870
28,600
6,966
21,634
1982
2006
35 years
Westminster Terrace
Westminster
CA
—
1,700
11,514
22
1,700
11,536
13,236
2,397
10,839
2001
2011
35 years
Highland Trail
Broomfield
CO
—
2,511
26,431
—
2,511
26,431
28,942
3,774
25,168
2009
2013
35 years
Caley Ridge
Englewood
CO
—
1,157
13,133
—
1,157
13,133
14,290
2,343
11,947
1999
2012
35 years
Garden Square at Westlake
Greeley
CO
—
630
8,211
—
630
8,211
8,841
1,775
7,066
1998
2011
35 years
Garden Square of Greeley
Greeley
CO
—
330
2,735
—
330
2,735
3,065
606
2,459
1995
2011
35 years
Lakewood Estates
Lakewood
CO
—
1,306
21,137
—
1,306
21,137
22,443
3,005
19,438
1988
2013
35 years
Sugar Valley Estates
Loveland
CO
—
1,255
21,837
—
1,255
21,837
23,092
3,103
19,989
2009
2013
35 years
Devonshire Acres
Sterling
CO
—
950
13,569
(2,922
)
965
10,632
11,597
2,330
9,267
1979
2011
35 years
158
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
The Hearth at Gardenside
Branford
CT
—
7,000
31,518
—
7,000
31,518
38,518
6,517
32,001
1999
2011
35 years
The Hearth at Tuxis Pond
Madison
CT
—
1,610
44,322
—
1,610
44,322
45,932
8,768
37,164
2002
2011
35 years
White Oaks
Manchester
CT
—
2,584
34,507
—
2,584
34,507
37,091
4,914
32,177
2007
2013
35 years
Willows Care Home
Romford
UK
—
4,695
6,983
(970
)
4,305
6,403
10,708
633
10,075
1986
2015
40 years
Cedars Care Home
Southend-on-Sea
UK
—
2,649
4,925
(628
)
2,429
4,517
6,946
460
6,486
2014
2015
40 years
Hampton Manor Belleview
Belleview
FL
—
390
8,337
—
390
8,337
8,727
1,781
6,946
1988
2011
35 years
Sabal House
Cantonment
FL
—
430
5,902
—
430
5,902
6,332
1,236
5,096
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Coral Springs
Coral Springs
FL
—
3,280
11,877
689
3,280
12,566
15,846
2,613
13,233
1999
2011
35 years
Stanley House
Defuniak Springs
FL
—
410
5,659
—
410
5,659
6,069
1,184
4,885
1999
2011
35 years
The Peninsula
Hollywood
FL
—
3,660
9,122
1,307
3,660
10,429
14,089
2,277
11,812
1972
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Timberlin Parc
Jacksonville
FL
—
455
5,905
5
455
5,910
6,365
1,884
4,481
1998
2006
35 years
Forsyth House
Milton
FL
—
610
6,503
—
610
6,503
7,113
1,348
5,765
1999
2011
35 years
Princeton Village of Largo
Largo
FL
—
1,718
10,438
153
1,718
10,591
12,309
1,344
10,965
1992
2015
35 years
Barrington Terrace of Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
2,105
18,190
615
2,110
18,800
20,910
2,167
18,743
2001
2015
35 years
Barrington Terrace of Naples
Naples
FL
—
2,596
18,716
571
2,608
19,275
21,883
2,188
19,695
2004
2015
35 years
The Carlisle Naples
Naples
FL
—
8,406
78,091
—
8,406
78,091
86,497
15,720
70,777
1998
2011
35 years
Naples ALZ Development
Naples
FL
—
2,983
—
—
2,983
—
2,983
—
2,983
CIP
CIP
CIP
Hampton Manor at 24th Road
Ocala
FL
—
690
8,767
—
690
8,767
9,457
1,815
7,642
1996
2011
35 years
Hampton Manor at Deerwood
Ocala
FL
—
790
5,605
3,648
983
9,060
10,043
1,499
8,544
2005
2011
35 years
Las Palmas
Palm Coast
FL
—
984
30,009
—
984
30,009
30,993
4,249
26,744
2009
2013
35 years
Princeton Village of Palm Coast
Palm Coast
FL
—
1,958
24,525
42
1,958
24,567
26,525
2,578
23,947
2007
2015
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Pensacola
Pensacola
FL
—
2,230
2,362
154
2,230
2,516
4,746
790
3,956
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia House
Quincy
FL
—
400
5,190
—
400
5,190
5,590
1,104
4,486
1999
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Tallahassee
Tallahassee
FL
—
2,430
17,745
460
2,430
18,205
20,635
3,871
16,764
1999
2011
35 years
Magnolia Place
Tallahassee
FL
—
640
8,013
81
640
8,094
8,734
1,627
7,107
1999
2011
35 years
Bristol Park of Tamarac
Tamarac
FL
—
3,920
14,130
718
3,920
14,848
18,768
3,023
15,745
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Carrolwood
Tampa
FL
—
5,410
20,944
634
5,410
21,578
26,988
4,692
22,296
2001
2011
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Athens
Athens
GA
—
1,767
16,442
439
1,770
16,878
18,648
1,759
16,889
1998
2015
35 years
Arbor Terrace at Cascade
Atlanta
GA
—
3,052
9,040
662
3,057
9,697
12,754
1,440
11,314
1999
2015
35 years
Augusta Gardens
Augusta
GA
—
530
10,262
308
543
10,557
11,100
2,239
8,861
1997
2011
35 years
Benton House of Covington
Covington
GA
7,594
1,297
11,397
142
1,297
11,539
12,836
1,271
11,565
2009
2015
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Decatur
Decatur
GA
—
3,102
19,599
(1,371
)
1,292
20,038
21,330
2,053
19,277
1990
2015
35 years
Benton House of Douglasville
Douglasville
GA
—
1,697
15,542
78
1,697
15,620
17,317
1,673
15,644
2010
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinez
Martinez
GA
—
408
6,764
5
408
6,769
7,177
2,029
5,148
1997
2007
35 years
Benton House of Newnan
Newnan
GA
—
1,474
17,487
157
1,474
17,644
19,118
1,839
17,279
2010
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Roswell
Roswell
GA
—
1,867
15,835
24
1,867
15,859
17,726
1,595
16,131
1997
2014
35 years
Benton Village of Stockbridge
Stockbridge
GA
—
2,221
21,989
456
2,227
22,439
24,666
2,411
22,255
2008
2015
35 years
Benton House of Sugar Hill
Sugar Hill
GA
—
2,173
14,937
101
2,173
15,038
17,211
1,698
15,513
2010
2015
35 years
Mayflower Care Home
Northfleet
UK
—
4,330
7,519
(983
)
3,971
6,895
10,866
695
10,171
2012
2015
40 years
159
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Villas of St. James - Breese, IL
Breese
IL
—
671
6,849
—
671
6,849
7,520
852
6,668
2009
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Chatham, IL
Chatham
IL
—
1,185
8,910
—
1,185
8,910
10,095
1,140
8,955
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Effingham, IL
Effingham
IL
—
508
6,624
—
508
6,624
7,132
801
6,331
2011
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Herrin, IL
Herrin
IL
—
2,175
9,605
—
2,175
9,605
11,780
1,416
10,364
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Marshall, IL
Marshall
IL
—
1,461
4,881
—
1,461
4,881
6,342
837
5,505
2012
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook - Newton, IL
Newton
IL
—
458
4,590
—
458
4,590
5,048
616
4,432
2011
2015
35 years
Rochester Senior Living at Wyndcrest
Rochester
IL
—
570
6,536
108
570
6,644
7,214
767
6,447
2005
2015
35 years
Villas of Holly Brook, Shelbyville, IL
Shelbyville
IL
—
2,292
3,351
—
2,292
3,351
5,643
921
4,722
2011
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Muncie
Muncie
IN
—
244
11,218
4
244
11,222
11,466
3,366
8,100
1998
2007
35 years
Wood Ridge
South Bend
IN
—
590
4,850
(35
)
590
4,815
5,405
1,059
4,346
1990
2011
35 years
Maples Care Home
Bexleyheath
UK
—
5,042
7,525
(1,043
)
4,624
6,900
11,524
689
10,835
2007
2015
40 years
Barty House Nursing Home
Maidstone
UK
—
3,769
3,089
(569
)
3,456
2,833
6,289
407
5,882
2013
2015
40 years
Tunbridge Wells Care Centre
Tunbridge Wells
UK
—
4,323
5,869
(846
)
3,964
5,382
9,346
593
8,753
2010
2015
40 years
Elmcroft of Florence (KY)
Florence
KY
—
1,535
21,826
10
1,535
21,836
23,371
2,182
21,189
2010
2014
35 years
Hartland Hills
Lexington
KY
—
1,468
23,929
—
1,468
23,929
25,397
3,401
21,996
2001
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Mount Washington
Mount Washington
KY
—
758
12,048
8
758
12,056
12,814
1,204
11,610
2005
2014
35 years
Heathlands Care Home
Chingford
UK
—
5,398
7,967
(1,109
)
4,950
7,306
12,256
744
11,512
1980
2015
40 years
Heritage Woods
Agawam
MA
—
1,249
4,625
—
1,249
4,625
5,874
2,404
3,470
1997
2004
30 years
Devonshire Estates
Lenox
MA
—
1,832
31,124
—
1,832
31,124
32,956
4,423
28,533
1998
2013
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Hagerstown
Hagerstown
MD
—
2,010
1,293
273
2,010
1,566
3,576
539
3,037
1999
2011
35 years
Clover Healthcare
Auburn
ME
—
1,400
26,895
876
1,400
27,771
29,171
6,014
23,157
1982
2011
35 years
Gorham House
Gorham
ME
—
1,360
33,147
1,472
1,527
34,452
35,979
6,825
29,154
1990
2011
35 years
Kittery Estates
Kittery
ME
—
1,531
30,811
—
1,531
30,811
32,342
4,373
27,969
2009
2013
35 years
Woods at Canco
Portland
ME
—
1,441
45,578
—
1,441
45,578
47,019
6,452
40,567
2000
2013
35 years
Sentry Inn at York Harbor
York Harbor
ME
—
3,490
19,869
—
3,490
19,869
23,359
4,061
19,298
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Downriver
Brownstown Charter Township
MI
—
320
32,652
437
371
33,038
33,409
6,667
26,742
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of East Lansing
East Lansing
MI
—
1,956
18,122
398
1,956
18,520
20,476
3,128
17,348
1989
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Kentwood
Kentwood
MI
—
510
13,976
(3,503
)
481
10,502
10,983
3,361
7,622
2001
2011
35 years
Primrose Austin
Austin
MN
—
2,540
11,707
443
2,540
12,150
14,690
2,369
12,321
2002
2011
35 years
Primrose Duluth
Duluth
MN
—
6,190
8,296
257
6,245
8,498
14,743
1,902
12,841
2003
2011
35 years
Primrose Mankato
Mankato
MN
—
1,860
8,920
352
1,860
9,272
11,132
1,978
9,154
1999
2011
35 years
Lodge at White Bear
White Bear Lake
MN
—
732
24,999
—
732
24,999
25,731
3,538
22,193
2002
2013
35 years
Assisted Living at the Meadowlands - O'Fallon, MO
O'Fallon
MO
—
2,326
14,158
—
2,326
14,158
16,484
1,760
14,724
1999
2015
35 years
Canyon Creek Inn Memory Care
Billings
MT
—
420
11,217
7
420
11,224
11,644
2,212
9,432
2011
2011
35 years
Spring Creek Inn Alzheimer's Community
Bozeman
MT
—
1,345
16,877
—
1,345
16,877
18,222
470
17,752
2010
2017
35 years
The Springs at Missoula
Missoula
MT
16,500
1,975
34,390
1,375
1,975
35,765
37,740
6,046
31,694
2004
2012
35 years
Carillon ALF of Asheboro
Asheboro
NC
—
680
15,370
—
680
15,370
16,050
3,109
12,941
1998
2011
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Asheville
Asheville
NC
—
1,365
15,679
532
1,365
16,211
17,576
1,753
15,823
1998
2015
35 years
160
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Elmcroft of Little Avenue
Charlotte
NC
—
250
5,077
7
250
5,084
5,334
1,620
3,714
1997
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Cramer Mountain
Cramerton
NC
—
530
18,225
—
530
18,225
18,755
3,710
15,045
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Harrisburg
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,660
15,130
—
1,660
15,130
16,790
3,070
13,720
1997
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
NC
—
2,210
7,372
—
2,210
7,372
9,582
1,669
7,913
2005
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Hillsborough
Hillsborough
NC
—
1,450
19,754
—
1,450
19,754
21,204
3,962
17,242
2005
2011
35 years
Willow Grove
Matthews
NC
—
763
27,544
—
763
27,544
28,307
3,897
24,410
2009
2013
35 years
Carillon ALF of Newton
Newton
NC
—
540
14,935
—
540
14,935
15,475
3,021
12,454
2000
2011
35 years
Independence Village of Olde Raleigh
Raleigh
NC
—
1,989
18,648
—
1,989
18,648
20,637
3,201
17,436
1991
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Northridge
Raleigh
NC
—
184
3,592
16
184
3,608
3,792
1,147
2,645
1984
2006
35 years
Carillon ALF of Salisbury
Salisbury
NC
—
1,580
25,026
—
1,580
25,026
26,606
4,973
21,633
1999
2011
35 years
Carillon ALF of Shelby
Shelby
NC
—
660
15,471
—
660
15,471
16,131
3,140
12,991
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Southern Pines
Southern Pines
NC
—
1,196
10,766
14
1,196
10,780
11,976
2,385
9,591
1998
2010
35 years
Carillon ALF of Southport
Southport
NC
—
1,330
10,356
—
1,330
10,356
11,686
2,223
9,463
2005
2011
35 years
Primrose Bismarck
Bismarck
ND
—
1,210
9,768
255
1,210
10,023
11,233
2,041
9,192
1994
2011
35 years
Wellington ALF - Minot ND
Minot
ND
—
3,241
9,509
—
3,241
9,509
12,750
1,462
11,288
2005
2015
35 years
Crown Pointe
Omaha
NE
—
1,316
11,950
1,700
1,316
13,650
14,966
4,318
10,648
1985
2005
35 years
Birch Heights
Derry
NH
—
1,413
30,267
—
1,413
30,267
31,680
4,294
27,386
2009
2013
35 years
Bear Canyon Estates
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,879
36,223
—
1,879
36,223
38,102
5,142
32,960
1997
2013
35 years
The Woodmark at Uptown
Albuquerque
NM
—
2,439
33,276
451
2,451
33,715
36,166
3,404
32,762
2000
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Quintessence
Albuquerque
NM
—
1,150
26,527
426
1,165
26,938
28,103
5,483
22,620
1998
2011
35 years
Prestige Assisted Living at Mira Loma
Henderson
NV
—
1,279
12,558
—
1,279
12,558
13,837
739
13,098
1998
2016
35 years
The Amberleigh
Buffalo
NY
—
3,498
19,097
5,836
3,498
24,933
28,431
7,058
21,373
1988
2005
35 years
The Hearth at Castle Gardens
Vestal
NY
—
1,830
20,312
2,230
1,885
22,487
24,372
5,685
18,687
1994
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Lima
Lima
OH
—
490
3,368
11
490
3,379
3,869
1,075
2,794
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Ontario
Mansfield
OH
—
523
7,968
12
523
7,980
8,503
2,543
5,960
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Medina
Medina
OH
—
661
9,788
7
661
9,795
10,456
3,123
7,333
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Washington Township
Miamisburg
OH
—
1,235
12,611
6
1,235
12,617
13,852
4,024
9,828
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Sagamore Hills
Sagamore Hills
OH
—
980
12,604
29
980
12,633
13,613
4,023
9,590
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lorain
Vermilion
OH
—
500
15,461
532
557
15,936
16,493
3,562
12,931
2000
2011
35 years
Gardens at Westlake Senior Living
Westlake
OH
—
2,401
20,640
128
2,401
20,768
23,169
2,352
20,817
1987
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Xenia
Xenia
OH
—
653
2,801
1
653
2,802
3,455
894
2,561
1999
2006
35 years
Arbor House of Mustang
Mustang
OK
—
372
3,587
—
372
3,587
3,959
600
3,359
1999
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Norman
Norman
OK
—
444
7,525
—
444
7,525
7,969
1,252
6,717
2000
2012
35 years
Arbor House Reminisce Center
Norman
OK
—
438
3,028
—
438
3,028
3,466
509
2,957
2004
2012
35 years
Arbor House of Midwest City
Oklahoma City
OK
—
544
9,133
—
544
9,133
9,677
1,519
8,158
2004
2012
35 years
Mansion at Waterford
Oklahoma City
OK
—
2,077
14,184
—
2,077
14,184
16,261
2,531
13,730
1999
2012
35 years
Meadowbrook Place
Baker City
OR
—
1,430
5,311
—
1,430
5,311
6,741
566
6,175
1965
2014
35 years
Edgewood Downs
Beaverton
OR
—
2,356
15,476
—
2,356
15,476
17,832
2,227
15,605
1978
2013
35 years
Princeton Village Assisted Living
Clackamas
OR
2,691
1,126
10,283
56
1,126
10,339
11,465
1,137
10,328
1999
2015
35 years
161
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Bayside Terrace Assisted Living
Coos Bay
OR
—
498
2,795
423
498
3,218
3,716
317
3,399
2006
2015
35 years
Ocean Ridge Assisted Living
Coos Bay
OR
—
2,681
10,941
(94
)
2,681
10,847
13,528
1,414
12,114
2006
2015
35 years
Avamere at Hillsboro
Hillsboro
OR
—
4,400
8,353
1,209
4,400
9,562
13,962
2,232
11,730
2000
2011
35 years
The Springs at Tanasbourne
Hillsboro
OR
33,282
4,689
55,035
—
4,689
55,035
59,724
9,933
49,791
2009
2013
35 years
The Arbor at Avamere Court
Keizer
OR
—
922
6,460
108
1,135
6,355
7,490
808
6,682
2012
2014
35 years
Pelican Pointe
Klamath Falls
OR
11,614
943
26,237
113
943
26,350
27,293
2,691
24,602
2011
2015
35 years
The Stafford
Lake Oswego
OR
—
1,800
16,122
644
1,806
16,760
18,566
3,542
15,024
2008
2011
35 years
The Springs at Clackamas Woods
Milwaukie
OR
14,755
1,264
22,429
—
1,264
22,429
23,693
3,944
19,749
1999
2012
35 years
Clackamas Woods Assisted Living
Milwaukie
OR
7,945
681
12,077
—
681
12,077
12,758
2,123
10,635
1999
2012
35 years
Pheasant Pointe Assisted Living
Molalla
OR
—
904
7,433
(107
)
904
7,326
8,230
701
7,529
1998
2015
35 years
Avamere at Newberg
Newberg
OR
—
1,320
4,664
588
1,342
5,230
6,572
1,323
5,249
1999
2011
35 years
Avamere Living at Berry Park
Oregon City
OR
—
1,910
4,249
2,298
1,910
6,547
8,457
1,666
6,791
1972
2011
35 years
McLoughlin Place Senior Living
Oregon City
OR
—
2,418
26,819
—
2,418
26,819
29,237
2,822
26,415
1997
2014
35 years
Avamere at Bethany
Portland
OR
—
3,150
16,740
227
3,150
16,967
20,117
3,605
16,512
2002
2011
35 years
Cedar Village Assisted Living
Salem
OR
—
868
12,652
—
868
12,652
13,520
1,115
12,405
1999
2015
35 years
Redwood Heights Assisted Living
Salem
OR
—
1,513
16,774
(175
)
1,513
16,599
18,112
1,513
16,599
1999
2015
35 years
Avamere at Sandy
Sandy
OR
—
1,000
7,309
276
1,000
7,585
8,585
1,760
6,825
1999
2011
35 years
Suzanne Elise ALF
Seaside
OR
—
1,940
4,027
66
1,940
4,093
6,033
1,160
4,873
1998
2011
35 years
Necanicum Village
Seaside
OR
—
2,212
7,311
52
2,212
7,363
9,575
767
8,808
2001
2015
35 years
Avamere at Sherwood
Sherwood
OR
—
1,010
7,051
259
1,010
7,310
8,320
1,707
6,613
2000
2011
35 years
Chateau Gardens
Springfield
OR
—
1,550
4,197
—
1,550
4,197
5,747
875
4,872
1991
2011
35 years
Avamere at St Helens
St. Helens
OR
—
1,410
10,496
488
1,410
10,984
12,394
2,428
9,966
2000
2011
35 years
Flagstone Senior Living
The Dalles
OR
—
1,631
17,786
—
1,631
17,786
19,417
1,867
17,550
1991
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Allison Park
Allison Park
PA
—
1,171
5,686
8
1,171
5,694
6,865
1,814
5,051
1986
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Chippewa
Beaver Falls
PA
—
1,394
8,586
5
1,394
8,591
9,985
2,740
7,245
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Berwick
Berwick
PA
—
111
6,741
4
111
6,745
6,856
2,151
4,705
1998
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Lakemont
Bridgeville
PA
—
1,660
12,624
205
1,660
12,829
14,489
2,787
11,702
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Dillsburg
Dillsburg
PA
—
432
7,797
—
432
7,797
8,229
2,488
5,741
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Altoona
Duncansville
PA
—
331
4,729
4
331
4,733
5,064
1,509
3,555
1997
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
PA
—
240
7,336
4
240
7,340
7,580
2,341
5,239
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lewisburg
Lewisburg
PA
—
232
5,666
—
232
5,666
5,898
1,808
4,090
1999
2006
35 years
Lehigh Commons
Macungie
PA
—
420
4,406
450
420
4,856
5,276
2,504
2,772
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Loyalsock
Montoursville
PA
—
413
3,412
—
413
3,412
3,825
1,089
2,736
1999
2006
35 years
Highgate at Paoli Pointe
Paoli
PA
—
1,151
9,079
—
1,151
9,079
10,230
4,344
5,886
1997
2004
30 years
Elmcroft of Mid Valley
Peckville
PA
—
619
11,662
3
619
11,665
12,284
1,163
11,121
1998
2014
35 years
Sanatoga Court
Pottstown
PA
—
360
3,233
—
360
3,233
3,593
1,604
1,989
1997
2004
30 years
Berkshire Commons
Reading
PA
—
470
4,301
—
470
4,301
4,771
2,132
2,639
1997
2004
30 years
Mifflin Court
Reading
PA
—
689
4,265
351
689
4,616
5,305
2,048
3,257
1997
2004
35 years
Elmcroft of Reading
Reading
PA
—
638
4,942
3
638
4,945
5,583
1,577
4,006
1998
2006
35 years
162
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Elmcroft of Reedsville
Reedsville
PA
—
189
5,170
8
189
5,178
5,367
1,650
3,717
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Saxonburg
Saxonburg
PA
—
770
5,949
17
770
5,966
6,736
1,899
4,837
1994
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shippensburg
Shippensburg
PA
—
203
7,634
—
203
7,634
7,837
2,436
5,401
1999
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of State College
State College
PA
—
320
7,407
6
320
7,413
7,733
2,364
5,369
1997
2006
35 years
Outlook Pointe at York
York
PA
—
1,260
6,923
216
1,260
7,139
8,399
1,523
6,876
1999
2011
35 years
The Garden House
Anderson
SC
7,566
969
15,613
85
969
15,698
16,667
1,705
14,962
2000
2015
35 years
Forest Pines
Columbia
SC
—
1,058
27,471
—
1,058
27,471
28,529
3,893
24,636
1998
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Florence SC
Florence
SC
—
108
7,620
230
108
7,850
7,958
2,441
5,517
1998
2006
35 years
Primrose Aberdeen
Aberdeen
SD
—
850
659
235
850
894
1,744
339
1,405
1991
2011
35 years
Primrose Place
Aberdeen
SD
—
310
3,242
53
310
3,295
3,605
701
2,904
2000
2011
35 years
Primrose Rapid City
Rapid City
SD
—
860
8,722
88
860
8,810
9,670
1,880
7,790
1997
2011
35 years
Primrose Sioux Falls
Sioux Falls
SD
—
2,180
12,936
315
2,180
13,251
15,431
2,848
12,583
2002
2011
35 years
Ashridge Court
Bexhill-on-Sea
UK
—
2,274
4,791
(587
)
2,085
4,393
6,478
506
5,972
2010
2015
40 years
Inglewood Nursing Home
Eastbourne
UK
—
1,908
3,021
(409
)
1,750
2,770
4,520
368
4,152
2010
2015
40 years
Pentlow Nursing Home
Eastbourne
UK
—
1,964
2,462
(367
)
1,801
2,258
4,059
318
3,741
2007
2015
40 years
Outlook Pointe of Bristol
Bristol
TN
—
470
16,006
315
470
16,321
16,791
3,222
13,569
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hamilton Place
Chattanooga
TN
—
87
4,248
9
87
4,257
4,344
1,356
2,988
1998
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Shallowford
Chattanooga
TN
—
580
7,568
523
582
8,089
8,671
2,047
6,624
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Hendersonville
Hendersonville
TN
—
600
5,304
52
600
5,356
5,956
536
5,420
1999
2014
35 years
Regency House
Hixson
TN
—
140
6,611
—
140
6,611
6,751
1,379
5,372
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Jackson
Jackson
TN
—
768
16,840
8
768
16,848
17,616
1,679
15,937
1998
2014
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Johnson City
Johnson City
TN
—
590
10,043
400
590
10,443
11,033
2,075
8,958
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Kingsport
Kingsport
TN
—
22
7,815
7
22
7,822
7,844
2,494
5,350
2000
2006
35 years
Arbor Terrace of Knoxville
Knoxville
TN
—
590
15,862
533
590
16,395
16,985
1,778
15,207
1997
2015
35 years
Elmcroft of Halls
Knoxville
TN
—
387
4,948
10
387
4,958
5,345
496
4,849
1998
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of West Knoxville
Knoxville
TN
—
439
10,697
26
439
10,723
11,162
3,414
7,748
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Lebanon
Lebanon
TN
—
180
7,086
391
180
7,477
7,657
2,277
5,380
2000
2006
35 years
Elmcroft of Bartlett
Memphis
TN
—
570
25,552
377
570
25,929
26,499
5,302
21,197
1999
2011
35 years
Kennington Place
Memphis
TN
—
1,820
4,748
815
1,820
5,563
7,383
1,895
5,488
1989
2011
35 years
The Glenmary
Memphis
TN
—
510
5,860
477
510
6,337
6,847
1,692
5,155
1964
2011
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Murfreesboro
Murfreesboro
TN
—
940
8,030
316
940
8,346
9,286
1,724
7,562
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Brentwood
Nashville
TN
—
960
22,020
654
960
22,674
23,634
4,862
18,772
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Arlington
Arlington
TX
—
2,650
14,060
539
2,650
14,599
17,249
3,304
13,945
1998
2011
35 years
Meadowbrook ALZ
Arlington
TX
—
755
4,677
940
755
5,617
6,372
922
5,450
2012
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Austin
Austin
TX
—
2,770
25,820
610
2,770
26,430
29,200
5,536
23,664
2000
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Bedford
Bedford
TX
—
770
19,691
699
770
20,390
21,160
4,351
16,809
1999
2011
35 years
Highland Estates
Cedar Park
TX
—
1,679
28,943
—
1,679
28,943
30,622
4,112
26,510
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Rivershire
Conroe
TX
—
860
32,671
714
860
33,385
34,245
6,892
27,353
1997
2011
35 years
Flower Mound
Flower Mound
TX
—
900
5,512
—
900
5,512
6,412
1,170
5,242
1995
2011
35 years
163
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Arbor House Granbury
Granbury
TX
—
390
8,186
—
390
8,186
8,576
1,359
7,217
2007
2012
35 years
Copperfield Estates
Houston
TX
—
1,216
21,135
—
1,216
21,135
22,351
3,003
19,348
2009
2013
35 years
Elmcroft of Braeswood
Houston
TX
—
3,970
15,919
646
3,970
16,565
20,535
3,707
16,828
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Cy-Fair
Houston
TX
—
1,580
21,801
437
1,593
22,225
23,818
4,653
19,165
1998
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Irving
Irving
TX
—
1,620
18,755
469
1,620
19,224
20,844
4,119
16,725
1999
2011
35 years
Whitley Place
Keller
TX
—
—
5,100
773
—
5,873
5,873
1,452
4,421
1998
2008
35 years
Elmcroft of Lake Jackson
Lake Jackson
TX
—
710
14,765
443
710
15,208
15,918
3,316
12,602
1998
2011
35 years
Arbor House Lewisville
Lewisville
TX
—
824
10,308
—
824
10,308
11,132
1,719
9,413
2007
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Vista Ridge
Lewisville
TX
—
6,280
10,548
(12,221
)
1,921
2,686
4,607
2,150
2,457
1998
2011
35 years
Polo Park Estates
Midland
TX
—
765
29,447
—
765
29,447
30,212
4,166
26,046
1996
2013
35 years
Arbor Hills Memory Care Community
Plano
TX
—
1,014
5,719
—
1,014
5,719
6,733
858
5,875
2013
2013
35 years
Arbor House of Rockwall
Rockwall
TX
—
1,537
12,883
—
1,537
12,883
14,420
2,160
12,260
2009
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Windcrest
San Antonio
TX
—
920
13,011
586
920
13,597
14,517
3,113
11,404
1999
2011
35 years
Paradise Springs
Spring
TX
—
1,488
24,556
—
1,488
24,556
26,044
3,490
22,554
2008
2013
35 years
Arbor House of Temple
Temple
TX
—
473
6,750
—
473
6,750
7,223
1,124
6,099
2008
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Cottonwood
Temple
TX
—
630
17,515
439
630
17,954
18,584
3,810
14,774
1997
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Mainland
Texas City
TX
—
520
14,849
547
520
15,396
15,916
3,355
12,561
1996
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Victoria
Victoria
TX
—
440
13,040
445
440
13,485
13,925
2,959
10,966
1997
2011
35 years
Arbor House of Weatherford
Weatherford
TX
—
233
3,347
—
233
3,347
3,580
557
3,023
1994
2012
35 years
Elmcroft of Wharton
Wharton
TX
—
320
13,799
674
320
14,473
14,793
3,254
11,539
1996
2011
35 years
Mountain Ridge
South Ogden
UT
11,218
1,243
24,659
—
1,243
24,659
25,902
2,516
23,386
2001
2014
35 years
Elmcroft of Chesterfield
Richmond
VA
—
829
6,534
8
829
6,542
7,371
2,085
5,286
1999
2006
35 years
Pheasant Ridge
Roanoke
VA
—
1,813
9,027
—
1,813
9,027
10,840
1,611
9,229
1999
2012
35 years
Cascade Valley Senior Living
Arlington
WA
—
1,413
6,294
—
1,413
6,294
7,707
651
7,056
1995
2014
35 years
The Bellingham at Orchard
Bellingham
WA
—
3,383
17,553
(81
)
3,381
17,474
20,855
1,516
19,339
1999
2015
35 years
Bay Pointe Retirement
Bremerton
WA
—
2,114
21,006
360
2,114
21,366
23,480
2,161
21,319
1999
2015
35 years
Cooks Hill Manor
Centralia
WA
—
520
6,144
35
520
6,179
6,699
1,385
5,314
1993
2011
35 years
Edmonds Landing
Edmonds
WA
—
4,273
27,852
(218
)
4,273
27,634
31,907
2,310
29,597
2001
2015
35 years
The Terrace at Beverly Lake
Everett
WA
—
1,515
12,520
(25
)
1,514
12,496
14,010
1,069
12,941
1998
2015
35 years
The Sequoia
Olympia
WA
—
1,490
13,724
108
1,490
13,832
15,322
2,931
12,391
1995
2011
35 years
Bishop Place Senior Living
Pullman
WA
—
1,780
33,608
—
1,780
33,608
35,388
3,415
31,973
1998
2014
35 years
Willow Gardens
Puyallup
WA
—
1,959
35,492
—
1,959
35,492
37,451
5,041
32,410
1996
2013
35 years
Birchview
Sedro-Woolley
WA
—
210
14,145
98
210
14,243
14,453
2,782
11,671
1996
2011
35 years
Discovery Memory care
Sequim
WA
—
320
10,544
132
320
10,676
10,996
2,171
8,825
1961
2011
35 years
The Village Retirement & Assisted Living
Tacoma
WA
—
2,200
5,938
637
2,200
6,575
8,775
1,618
7,157
1976
2011
35 years
Clearwater Springs
Vancouver
WA
—
1,269
9,840
193
1,269
10,033
11,302
1,188
10,114
2003
2015
35 years
Matthews of Appleton I
Appleton
WI
—
130
1,834
(41
)
130
1,793
1,923
411
1,512
1996
2011
35 years
Matthews of Appleton II
Appleton
WI
—
140
2,016
301
140
2,317
2,457
484
1,973
1997
2011
35 years
164
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Hunters Ridge
Beaver Dam
WI
—
260
2,380
—
260
2,380
2,640
522
2,118
1998
2011
35 years
Harbor House Beloit
Beloit
WI
—
150
4,356
427
191
4,742
4,933
916
4,017
1990
2011
35 years
Harbor House Clinton
Clinton
WI
—
290
4,390
—
290
4,390
4,680
889
3,791
1991
2011
35 years
Creekside
Cudahy
WI
—
760
1,693
—
760
1,693
2,453
401
2,052
2001
2011
35 years
Harbor House Eau Claire
Eau Claire
WI
—
210
6,259
—
210
6,259
6,469
1,242
5,227
1996
2011
35 years
Chapel Valley
Fitchburg
WI
—
450
2,372
—
450
2,372
2,822
527
2,295
1998
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee II
Fox Point
WI
—
1,810
943
37
1,820
970
2,790
310
2,480
1999
2011
35 years
Laurel Oaks
Glendale
WI
—
2,390
43,587
3,556
2,510
47,023
49,533
9,097
40,436
1988
2011
35 years
Layton Terrace
Greenfield
WI
—
3,490
39,201
382
3,480
39,593
43,073
8,084
34,989
1999
2011
35 years
Matthews of Hartland
Hartland
WI
—
640
1,663
43
652
1,694
2,346
467
1,879
1985
2011
35 years
Matthews of Horicon
Horicon
WI
—
340
3,327
(95
)
345
3,227
3,572
801
2,771
2002
2011
35 years
Jefferson
Jefferson
WI
—
330
2,384
—
330
2,384
2,714
523
2,191
1997
2011
35 years
Harbor House Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
710
3,254
3,641
1,156
6,449
7,605
1,031
6,574
1996
2011
35 years
Harbor House Manitowoc
Manitowoc
WI
—
140
1,520
—
140
1,520
1,660
324
1,336
1997
2011
35 years
Adare II
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
(493
)
94
60
154
154
—
1994
2011
35 years
Adare IV
Menasha
WI
—
110
537
(503
)
94
50
144
144
—
1994
2011
35 years
Adare III
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
(493
)
65
89
154
154
—
1993
2011
35 years
Adare I
Menasha
WI
—
90
557
(500
)
74
73
147
147
—
1993
2011
35 years
The Arboretum
Menomonee Falls
WI
—
5,640
49,083
1,813
5,640
50,896
56,536
10,640
45,896
1989
2011
35 years
Matthews of Milwaukee I
Milwaukee
WI
—
1,800
935
119
1,800
1,054
2,854
323
2,531
1999
2011
35 years
Hart Park Square
Milwaukee
WI
—
1,900
21,628
34
1,900
21,662
23,562
4,462
19,100
2005
2011
35 years
Harbor House Monroe
Monroe
WI
—
490
4,964
—
490
4,964
5,454
1,018
4,436
1990
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah I
Neenah
WI
—
710
1,157
64
713
1,218
1,931
342
1,589
2006
2011
35 years
Matthews of Neenah II
Neenah
WI
—
720
2,339
(50
)
720
2,289
3,009
583
2,426
2007
2011
35 years
Matthews of Irish Road
Neenah
WI
—
320
1,036
87
320
1,123
1,443
322
1,121
2001
2011
35 years
Matthews of Oak Creek
Oak Creek
WI
—
800
2,167
(2
)
812
2,153
2,965
515
2,450
1997
2011
35 years
Azura Memory Care of Oak Creek
Oak Creek
WI
—
727
6,254
—
727
6,254
6,981
120
6,861
2017
2017
35 years
Harbor House Oconomowoc
Oconomowoc
WI
—
400
1,596
4,674
709
5,961
6,670
497
6,173
2016
2015
35 years
Wilkinson Woods of Oconomowoc
Oconomowoc
WI
—
1,100
12,436
157
1,100
12,593
13,693
2,557
11,136
1992
2011
35 years
Harbor House Oshkosh
Oshkosh
WI
—
190
949
—
190
949
1,139
256
883
1993
2011
35 years
Matthews of Pewaukee
Pewaukee
WI
—
1,180
4,124
206
1,197
4,313
5,510
1,060
4,450
2001
2011
35 years
Harbor House Sheboygan
Sheboygan
WI
—
1,060
6,208
—
1,060
6,208
7,268
1,249
6,019
1995
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis I
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,428
(113
)
1,389
1,296
2,685
369
2,316
2000
2011
35 years
Matthews of St. Francis II
St. Francis
WI
—
1,370
1,666
15
1,377
1,674
3,051
428
2,623
2000
2011
35 years
Howard Village of St. Francis
St. Francis
WI
—
2,320
17,232
—
2,320
17,232
19,552
3,628
15,924
2001
2011
35 years
Harbor House Stoughton
Stoughton
WI
—
450
3,191
—
450
3,191
3,641
702
2,939
1992
2011
35 years
Oak Hill Terrace
Waukesha
WI
—
2,040
40,298
440
2,040
40,738
42,778
8,320
34,458
1985
2011
35 years
Harbor House Rib Mountain
Wausau
WI
—
350
3,413
—
350
3,413
3,763
707
3,056
1997
2011
35 years
165
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Library Square
West Allis
WI
—
1,160
23,714
—
1,160
23,714
24,874
4,868
20,006
1996
2011
35 years
Matthews of Wrightstown
Wrightstown
WI
—
140
376
12
140
388
528
148
380
1999
2011
35 years
Madison House
Kirkland
WA
—
4,291
26,787
—
4,291
26,787
31,078
755
30,323
1978
2017
35 years
Delaware Plaza
Longview
WA
4,189
620
5,116
—
620
5,116
5,736
142
5,594
1972
2017
35 years
Canterbury Gardens
Longview
WA
5,586
444
13,698
—
444
13,698
14,142
364
13,778
1998
2017
35 years
Canterbury Inn
Longview
WA
14,568
1,462
34,507
—
1,462
34,507
35,969
893
35,076
1989
2017
35 years
Canterbury Park
Longview
WA
—
969
30,109
—
969
30,109
31,078
834
30,244
2000
2017
35 years
Cascade Inn
Vancouver
WA
12,378
3,201
18,996
—
3,201
18,996
22,197
535
21,662
1979
2017
35 years
The Hampton & Ashley Inn
Vancouver
WA
—
1,855
21,047
—
1,855
21,047
22,902
581
22,321
1992
2017
35 years
The Hampton at Salmon Creek
Vancouver
WA
11,872
1,256
21,686
—
1,256
21,686
22,942
418
22,524
2013
2017
35 years
Outlook Pointe at Teays Valley
Hurricane
WV
—
1,950
14,489
300
1,950
14,789
16,739
2,912
13,827
1999
2011
35 years
Elmcroft of Martinsburg
Martinsburg
WV
—
248
8,320
9
248
8,329
8,577
2,655
5,922
1999
2006
35 years
Garden Square Assisted Living of Casper
Casper
WY
—
355
3,197
—
355
3,197
3,552
628
2,924
1996
2011
35 years
Whispering Chase
Cheyenne
WY
—
1,800
20,354
—
1,800
20,354
22,154
2,904
19,250
2008
2013
35 years
Hampton Care
Hampton
UK
—
3,923
27,637
—
3,923
27,637
31,560
485
31,075
2007
2017
40 years
Parkfield House Nursing Home
Uxbridge
UK
—
1,880
960
—
1,880
960
2,840
21
2,819
2000
2017
40 years
TOTAL FOR OTHER SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
190,394
519,074
4,646,262
52,129
511,585
4,705,880
5,217,465
831,359
4,386,106
TOTAL FOR SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITIES
942,667
1,498,988
13,957,788
618,741
1,502,949
14,572,568
16,075,517
3,417,584
12,657,933
MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #46
Birmingham
AL
—
—
25,298
4,061
—
29,359
29,359
8,989
20,370
2005
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #48
Birmingham
AL
—
—
12,698
509
—
13,207
13,207
3,641
9,566
1989
2010
35 years
St. Vincent's Medical Center East #52
Birmingham
AL
—
—
7,608
1,461
—
9,069
9,069
3,071
5,998
1985
2010
35 years
Crestwood Medical Pavilion
Huntsville
AL
3,226
625
16,178
159
625
16,337
16,962
3,804
13,158
1994
2011
35 years
Davita Dialysis - Marked Tree
Marked Tree
AR
—
179
1,580
—
179
1,580
1,759
190
1,569
2009
2015
35 years
West Valley Medical Center
Buckeye
AZ
—
3,348
5,233
—
3,348
5,233
8,581
775
7,806
2011
2015
31 years
Canyon Springs Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
—
—
27,497
532
—
28,029
28,029
5,939
22,090
2007
2012
35 years
Mercy Gilbert Medical Plaza
Gilbert
AZ
7,330
720
11,277
1,068
720
12,345
13,065
3,281
9,784
2007
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza
Glendale
AZ
—
—
12,904
871
20
13,755
13,775
2,927
10,848
1997
2011
35 years
Thunderbird Paseo Medical Plaza II
Glendale
AZ
—
—
8,100
516
20
8,596
8,616
1,972
6,644
2001
2011
35 years
Desert Medical Pavilion
Mesa
AZ
—
—
32,768
501
—
33,269
33,269
4,933
28,336
2003
2013
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building I
Mesa
AZ
—
—
11,923
677
4
12,596
12,600
2,630
9,970
1977
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building II
Mesa
AZ
—
—
7,395
405
4
7,796
7,800
1,800
6,000
1980
2011
35 years
Desert Samaritan Medical Building III
Mesa
AZ
—
—
13,665
1,203
—
14,868
14,868
3,219
11,649
1986
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building II
Phoenix
AZ
—
—
22,663
626
14
23,275
23,289
4,866
18,423
2002
2011
35 years
Deer Valley Medical Office Building III
Phoenix
AZ
—
—
19,521
287
12
19,796
19,808
4,239
15,569
2009
2011
35 years
166
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Papago Medical Park
Phoenix
AZ
—
—
12,172
1,561
—
13,733
13,733
2,983
10,750
1989
2011
35 years
North Valley Orthopedic Surgery Center
Phoenix
AZ
—
2,800
10,150
—
2,800
10,150
12,950
1,126
11,824
2006
2015
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza
Burbank
CA
—
1,241
23,322
1,149
1,268
24,444
25,712
6,084
19,628
2004
2011
35 years
Burbank Medical Plaza II
Burbank
CA
33,726
491
45,641
382
497
46,017
46,514
9,744
36,770
2008
2011
35 years
Eden Medical Plaza
Castro Valley
CA
—
258
2,455
394
328
2,779
3,107
1,147
1,960
1998
2011
25 years
Sutter Medical Center
Castro Valley
CA
—
—
25,088
1,387
—
26,475
26,475
3,810
22,665
2012
2012
35 years
United Healthcare - Cypress
Cypress
CA
—
12,883
38,309
—
12,883
38,309
51,192
5,414
45,778
1985
2015
29 years
NorthBay Corporate Headquarters
Fairfield
CA
—
—
19,187
—
—
19,187
19,187
3,061
16,126
2008
2012
35 years
Gateway Medical Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
12,872
65
—
12,937
12,937
2,054
10,883
1986
2012
35 years
Solano NorthBay Health Plaza
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,880
39
—
8,919
8,919
1,410
7,509
1990
2012
35 years
NorthBay Healthcare MOB
Fairfield
CA
—
—
8,507
2,280
—
10,787
10,787
2,073
8,714
2014
2013
35 years
UC Davis Medical
Folsom
CA
—
1,873
10,156
13
1,873
10,169
12,042
1,225
10,817
1995
2015
35 years
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg I
Glendale
CA
—
6,683
9,589
1,725
6,693
11,304
17,997
3,377
14,620
1972
2012
23 years
Verdugo Hills Professional Bldg II
Glendale
CA
—
4,464
3,731
2,359
4,469
6,085
10,554
2,079
8,475
1987
2012
19 years
Grossmont Medical Terrace
La Mesa
CA
—
88
14,192
126
88
14,318
14,406
850
13,556
2008
2016
35 years
St. Francis Lynwood Medical
Lynwood
CA
—
688
8,385
1,471
697
9,847
10,544
3,210
7,334
1993
2011
32 years
PMB Mission Hills
Mission Hills
CA
—
15,468
30,116
4,729
15,468
34,845
50,313
5,086
45,227
2012
2012
35 years
PDP Mission Viejo
Mission Viejo
CA
56,345
1,916
77,022
959
1,916
77,981
79,897
17,040
62,857
2007
2011
35 years
PDP Orange
Orange
CA
44,896
1,752
61,647
1,351
1,761
62,989
64,750
13,922
50,828
2008
2011
35 years
NHP/PMB Pasadena
Pasadena
CA
—
3,138
83,412
9,199
3,138
92,611
95,749
24,033
71,716
2009
2011
35 years
Western University of Health Sciences Medical Pavilion
Pomona
CA
—
91
31,523
—
91
31,523
31,614
6,547
25,067
2009
2011
35 years
Pomerado Outpatient Pavilion
Poway
CA
—
3,233
71,435
3,000
3,233
74,435
77,668
17,861
59,807
2007
2011
35 years
Sutter Van Ness
San Francisco
CA
34,675
—
84,520
—
—
84,520
84,520
—
84,520
CIP
CIP
CIP
San Gabriel Valley Medical
San Gabriel
CA
—
914
5,510
725
950
6,199
7,149
2,201
4,948
2004
2011
35 years
Santa Clarita Valley Medical
Santa Clarita
CA
22,236
9,708
20,020
1,500
9,782
21,446
31,228
5,104
26,124
2005
2011
35 years
Kenneth E Watts Medical Plaza
Torrance
CA
—
262
6,945
2,462
334
9,335
9,669
3,224
6,445
1989
2011
23 years
Vaca Valley Health Plaza
Vacaville
CA
—
—
9,634
612
—
10,246
10,246
1,516
8,730
1988
2012
35 years
Potomac Medical Plaza
Aurora
CO
—
2,401
9,118
3,162
2,800
11,881
14,681
5,655
9,026
1986
2007
35 years
Briargate Medical Campus
Colorado Springs
CO
—
1,238
12,301
442
1,259
12,722
13,981
4,710
9,271
2002
2007
35 years
Printers Park Medical Plaza
Colorado Springs
CO
—
2,641
47,507
1,828
2,641
49,335
51,976
17,936
34,040
1999
2007
35 years
Green Valley Ranch MOB
Denver
CO
5,485
—
12,139
1,011
235
12,915
13,150
1,841
11,309
2007
2012
35 years
Community Physicians Pavilion
Lafayette
CO
—
—
10,436
1,757
—
12,193
12,193
3,552
8,641
2004
2010
35 years
Exempla Good Samaritan Medical Center
Lafayette
CO
—
—
4,393
(75
)
—
4,318
4,318
504
3,814
2013
2013
35 years
Dakota Ridge
Littleton
CO
—
2,540
12,901
356
2,540
13,257
15,797
1,432
14,365
2007
2015
35 years
Avista Two Medical Plaza
Louisville
CO
—
—
17,330
1,811
—
19,141
19,141
6,242
12,899
2003
2009
35 years
The Sierra Medical Building
Parker
CO
—
1,444
14,059
3,287
1,492
17,298
18,790
6,712
12,078
2009
2009
35 years
Crown Point Healthcare Plaza
Parker
CO
—
852
5,210
109
852
5,319
6,171
860
5,311
2008
2013
35 years
167
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Lutheran Medical Office Building II
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
2,655
1,253
—
3,908
3,908
1,365
2,543
1976
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building IV
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
7,266
1,947
—
9,213
9,213
2,553
6,660
1991
2010
35 years
Lutheran Medical Office Building III
Wheat Ridge
CO
—
—
11,947
1,094
—
13,041
13,041
3,328
9,713
2004
2010
35 years
DePaul Professional Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
6,424
2,297
—
8,721
8,721
3,376
5,345
1987
2010
35 years
Providence Medical Office Building
Washington
DC
—
—
2,473
970
—
3,443
3,443
1,452
1,991
1975
2010
35 years
RTS Arcadia
Arcadia
FL
—
345
2,884
—
345
2,884
3,229
770
2,459
1993
2011
30 years
NorthBay Center For Primary Care - Vacaville
Vacaville
CA
—
777
5,632
—
777
5,632
6,409
47
6,362
1998
2017
35 years
Aventura Medical Plaza
Aventura
FL
—
401
3,338
49
401
3,387
3,788
675
3,113
1996
2015
26 years
RTS Cape Coral
Cape Coral
FL
—
368
5,448
—
368
5,448
5,816
1,229
4,587
1984
2011
34 years
RTS Englewood
Englewood
FL
—
1,071
3,516
—
1,071
3,516
4,587
851
3,736
1992
2011
35 years
RTS Ft. Myers
Fort Myers
FL
—
1,153
4,127
—
1,153
4,127
5,280
1,117
4,163
1989
2011
31 years
RTS Key West
Key West
FL
—
486
4,380
—
486
4,380
4,866
880
3,986
1987
2011
35 years
JFK Medical Plaza
Lake Worth
FL
—
453
1,711
303
453
2,014
2,467
799
1,668
1999
2004
35 years
East Pointe Medical Plaza
Lehigh Acres
FL
—
327
11,816
—
327
11,816
12,143
1,210
10,933
1994
2015
35 years
Palms West Building 6
Loxahatchee
FL
—
965
2,678
156
965
2,834
3,799
1,094
2,705
2000
2004
35 years
Bay Medical Plaza
Lynn Haven
FL
—
4,215
15,041
3
4,215
15,044
19,259
1,771
17,488
2003
2015
35 years
Aventura Heart & Health
Miami
FL
15,023
—
25,361
3,030
—
28,391
28,391
11,656
16,735
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Naples
Naples
FL
—
1,152
3,726
—
1,152
3,726
4,878
851
4,027
1999
2011
35 years
Bay Medical Center
Panama City
FL
—
82
17,400
3
82
17,403
17,485
1,779
15,706
1987
2015
35 years
Woodlands Center for Specialized Med
Pensacola
FL
14,073
2,518
24,006
30
2,518
24,036
26,554
5,399
21,155
2009
2012
35 years
RTS Pt. Charlotte
Pt Charlotte
FL
—
966
4,581
—
966
4,581
5,547
1,097
4,450
1985
2011
34 years
RTS Sarasota
Sarasota
FL
—
1,914
3,889
—
1,914
3,889
5,803
982
4,821
1996
2011
35 years
Capital Regional MOB I
Tallahassee
FL
—
590
8,773
59
590
8,832
9,422
812
8,610
1998
2015
35 years
University Medical Office Building
Tamarac
FL
—
—
6,690
393
5
7,078
7,083
2,755
4,328
2006
2007
35 years
RTS Venice
Venice
FL
—
1,536
4,104
—
1,536
4,104
5,640
997
4,643
1997
2011
35 years
Athens Medical Complex
Athens
GA
—
2,826
18,339
7
2,826
18,346
21,172
1,957
19,215
2011
2015
35 years
Doctors Center at St. Joseph's Hospital
Atlanta
GA
—
545
80,152
4,735
545
84,887
85,432
10,025
75,407
1978
2015
20 years
Augusta POB I
Augusta
GA
—
233
7,894
1,479
233
9,373
9,606
4,403
5,203
1978
2012
14 years
Augusta POB II
Augusta
GA
—
735
13,717
1,049
735
14,766
15,501
5,024
10,477
1987
2012
23 years
Augusta POB III
Augusta
GA
—
535
3,857
664
535
4,521
5,056
1,845
3,211
1994
2012
22 years
Augusta POB IV
Augusta
GA
—
675
2,182
2,115
691
4,281
4,972
1,519
3,453
1995
2012
23 years
Cobb Physicians Center
Austell
GA
—
1,145
16,805
1,228
1,145
18,033
19,178
5,249
13,929
1992
2011
35 years
Summit Professional Plaza I
Brunswick
GA
—
1,821
2,974
124
1,821
3,098
4,919
3,016
1,903
2004
2012
31 years
Summit Professional Plaza II
Brunswick
GA
—
981
13,818
33
981
13,851
14,832
3,380
11,452
1998
2012
35 years
Fayette MOB
Fayetteville
GA
—
895
20,669
372
895
21,041
21,936
2,164
19,772
2004
2015
35 years
Woodlawn Commons 1121/1163
Marietta
GA
—
5,495
16,028
1,150
5,540
17,133
22,673
1,872
20,801
1991
2015
35 years
PAPP Clinic
Newnan
GA
—
2,167
5,477
68
2,167
5,545
7,712
851
6,861
1994
2015
30 years
Parkway Physicians Center
Ringgold
GA
—
476
10,017
668
476
10,685
11,161
3,018
8,143
2004
2011
35 years
Riverdale MOB
Riverdale
GA
—
1,025
9,783
15
1,025
9,798
10,823
1,161
9,662
2005
2015
35 years
168
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Rush Copley POB I
Aurora
IL
—
120
27,882
449
120
28,331
28,451
2,927
25,524
1996
2015
34 years
Rush Copley POB II
Aurora
IL
—
49
27,217
457
49
27,674
27,723
2,785
24,938
2009
2015
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building I
Barrington
IL
—
152
3,224
227
152
3,451
3,603
521
3,082
1979
2013
35 years
Good Shepherd Physician Office Building II
Barrington
IL
—
512
12,977
438
512
13,415
13,927
2,092
11,835
1996
2013
35 years
Trinity Hospital Physician Office Building
Chicago
IL
—
139
3,329
1,121
139
4,450
4,589
656
3,933
1971
2013
35 years
Advocate Beverly Center
Chicago
IL
—
2,227
10,140
14
2,231
10,150
12,381
1,578
10,803
1986
2015
25 years
Crystal Lakes Medical Arts
Crystal Lake
IL
—
2,490
19,504
42
2,523
19,513
22,036
2,237
19,799
2007
2015
35 years
Advocate Good Shepherd
Crystal Lake
IL
—
2,444
10,953
112
2,444
11,065
13,509
1,452
12,057
2008
2015
33 years
Physicians Plaza East
Decatur
IL
—
—
791
1,894
—
2,685
2,685
756
1,929
1976
2010
35 years
Physicians Plaza West
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,943
597
—
2,540
2,540
938
1,602
1987
2010
35 years
SIU Family Practice
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,900
3,773
—
7,673
7,673
1,951
5,722
1996
2010
35 years
304 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
8,702
615
29
9,288
9,317
2,753
6,564
2002
2010
35 years
302 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
3,467
444
—
3,911
3,911
1,384
2,527
1993
2010
35 years
ENTA
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,150
16
—
1,166
1,166
415
751
1996
2010
35 years
301 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
—
640
—
—
640
640
319
321
1980
2010
35 years
South Shore Medical Building
Decatur
IL
—
902
129
56
958
129
1,087
198
889
1991
2010
35 years
Kenwood Medical Center
Decatur
IL
—
—
1,689
1,505
—
3,194
3,194
661
2,533
1997
2010
35 years
Corporate Health Services
Decatur
IL
—
934
1,386
—
934
1,386
2,320
614
1,706
1996
2010
35 years
Rock Springs Medical
Decatur
IL
—
399
495
—
399
495
894
234
660
1990
2010
35 years
575 W Hay Building
Decatur
IL
—
111
739
24
111
763
874
293
581
1984
2010
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building I
Downers Grove
IL
—
407
10,337
791
407
11,128
11,535
1,645
9,890
1976
2013
35 years
Good Samaritan Physician Office Building II
Downers Grove
IL
—
1,013
25,370
785
1,013
26,155
27,168
3,922
23,246
1995
2013
35 years
Eberle Medical Office Building ("Eberle MOB")
Elk Grove Village
IL
—
—
16,315
404
—
16,719
16,719
6,415
10,304
2005
2009
35 years
1425 Hunt Club Road MOB
Gurnee
IL
—
249
1,452
824
249
2,276
2,525
592
1,933
2005
2011
34 years
1445 Hunt Club Drive
Gurnee
IL
—
216
1,405
353
216
1,758
1,974
783
1,191
2002
2011
31 years
Gurnee Imaging Center
Gurnee
IL
—
82
2,731
—
82
2,731
2,813
655
2,158
2002
2011
35 years
Gurnee Center Club
Gurnee
IL
—
627
17,851
—
627
17,851
18,478
4,497
13,981
2001
2011
35 years
South Suburban Hospital Physician Office Building
Hazel Crest
IL
—
191
4,370
225
191
4,595
4,786
779
4,007
1989
2013
35 years
755 Milwaukee MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
421
3,716
1,665
630
5,172
5,802
2,672
3,130
1990
2011
18 years
890 Professional MOB
Libertyville
IL
—
214
2,630
276
214
2,906
3,120
1,018
2,102
1980
2011
26 years
Libertyville Center Club
Libertyville
IL
—
1,020
17,176
—
1,020
17,176
18,196
4,445
13,751
1988
2011
35 years
Christ Medical Center Physician Office Building
Oak Lawn
IL
—
658
16,421
1,066
658
17,487
18,145
2,487
15,658
1986
2013
35 years
Methodist North MOB
Peoria
IL
—
1,025
29,493
—
1,025
29,493
30,518
3,071
27,447
2010
2015
35 years
Davita Dialysis - Rockford
Rockford
IL
—
256
2,543
—
256
2,543
2,799
312
2,487
2009
2015
35 years
Round Lake ACC
Round Lake
IL
—
758
370
378
799
707
1,506
551
955
1984
2011
13 years
Vernon Hills Acute Care Center
Vernon Hills
IL
—
3,376
694
264
3,413
921
4,334
668
3,666
1986
2011
15 years
Wilbur S. Roby Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,653
870
—
3,523
3,523
1,397
2,126
1992
2010
35 years
169
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Ambulatory Services Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
4,266
1,733
—
5,999
5,999
2,271
3,728
1995
2010
35 years
St. John's Medical Arts Building
Anderson
IN
—
—
2,281
1,450
—
3,731
3,731
1,148
2,583
1973
2010
35 years
Carmel I
Carmel
IN
—
466
5,954
610
466
6,564
7,030
1,831
5,199
1985
2012
30 years
Carmel II
Carmel
IN
—
455
5,976
704
455
6,680
7,135
1,644
5,491
1989
2012
33 years
Carmel III
Carmel
IN
—
422
6,194
662
422
6,856
7,278
1,551
5,727
2001
2012
35 years
Elkhart
Elkhart
IN
—
1,256
1,973
—
1,256
1,973
3,229
1,111
2,118
1994
2011
32 years
Lutheran Medical Arts
Fort Wayne
IN
—
702
13,576
47
702
13,623
14,325
1,481
12,844
2000
2015
35 years
Dupont Road MOB
Fort Wayne
IN
—
633
13,479
154
672
13,594
14,266
1,583
12,683
2001
2015
35 years
Harcourt Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
519
28,951
2,419
519
31,370
31,889
8,030
23,859
1973
2012
28 years
Cardiac Professional Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
498
27,430
1,128
498
28,558
29,056
5,919
23,137
1995
2012
35 years
Oncology Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
470
5,703
230
470
5,933
6,403
1,642
4,761
2003
2012
35 years
CorVasc Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
514
9,617
14
514
9,631
10,145
562
9,583
2004
2016
36 years
St. Francis South Medical Office Building
Indianapolis
IN
—
—
20,649
1,121
—
21,770
21,770
3,602
18,168
1995
2013
35 years
Methodist Professional Center I
Indianapolis
IN
—
61
37,411
5,219
61
42,630
42,691
10,467
32,224
1985
2012
25 years
Indiana Orthopedic Center of Excellence
Indianapolis
IN
—
967
83,746
3,106
967
86,852
87,819
6,453
81,366
1997
2015
35 years
United Healthcare - Indy
Indianapolis
IN
—
5,737
32,116
—
5,737
32,116
37,853
3,599
34,254
1988
2015
35 years
LaPorte
La Porte
IN
—
553
1,309
—
553
1,309
1,862
479
1,383
1997
2011
34 years
Mishawaka
Mishawaka
IN
—
3,787
5,543
—
3,787
5,543
9,330
3,242
6,088
1993
2011
35 years
Cancer Care Partners
Mishawaka
IN
—
3,162
28,633
—
3,162
28,633
31,795
2,909
28,886
2010
2015
35 years
Michiana Oncology
Mishawaka
IN
—
4,577
20,939
4
4,581
20,939
25,520
2,228
23,292
2010
2015
35 years
DaVita Dialysis - Paoli
Paoli
IN
—
396
2,056
—
396
2,056
2,452
258
2,194
2011
2015
35 years
South Bend
South Bend
IN
—
792
2,530
—
792
2,530
3,322
766
2,556
1996
2011
34 years
Via Christi Clinic
Wichita
KS
—
1,883
7,428
—
1,883
7,428
9,311
922
8,389
2006
2015
35 years
OLBH Same Day Surgery Center MOB
Ashland
KY
—
101
19,066
608
101
19,674
19,775
4,819
14,956
1997
2012
26 years
St. Elizabeth Covington
Covington
KY
—
345
12,790
33
345
12,823
13,168
2,887
10,281
2009
2012
35 years
St. Elizabeth Florence MOB
Florence
KY
—
402
8,279
1,439
402
9,718
10,120
2,640
7,480
2005
2012
35 years
Jefferson Clinic
Louisville
KY
—
—
673
2,018
—
2,691
2,691
263
2,428
2013
2013
35 years
East Jefferson Medical Plaza
Metairie
LA
—
168
17,264
2,197
168
19,461
19,629
6,008
13,621
1996
2012
32 years
East Jefferson MOB
Metairie
LA
—
107
15,137
2,283
107
17,420
17,527
4,758
12,769
1985
2012
28 years
Lakeside POB I
Metairie
LA
—
3,334
4,974
3,198
3,334
8,172
11,506
3,279
8,227
1986
2011
22 years
Lakeside POB II
Metairie
LA
—
1,046
802
547
1,046
1,349
2,395
931
1,464
1980
2011
7 years
Fresenius Medical
Metairie
LA
—
1,195
3,797
—
1,195
3,797
4,992
427
4,565
2012
2015
35 years
RTS Berlin
Berlin
MD
—
—
2,216
—
—
2,216
2,216
546
1,670
1994
2011
29 years
Charles O. Fisher Medical Building
Westminster
MD
10,943
—
13,795
1,768
—
15,563
15,563
6,459
9,104
2009
2009
35 years
Medical Specialties Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
19,242
1,508
—
20,750
20,750
5,621
15,129
1989
2010
35 years
North Professional Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
7,228
1,633
—
8,861
8,861
3,001
5,860
1983
2010
35 years
Borgess Navigation Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
2,391
—
—
2,391
2,391
694
1,697
1976
2010
35 years
Borgess Health & Fitness Center
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
11,959
603
—
12,562
12,562
3,594
8,968
1984
2010
35 years
Heart Center Building
Kalamazoo
MI
—
—
8,420
440
10
8,850
8,860
2,876
5,984
1980
2010
35 years
170
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Medical Commons Building
Kalamazoo Township
MI
—
—
661
644
—
1,305
1,305
445
860
1979
2010
35 years
RTS Madison Heights
Madison Heights
MI
—
401
2,946
—
401
2,946
3,347
698
2,649
2002
2011
35 years
RTS Monroe
Monroe
MI
—
281
3,450
—
281
3,450
3,731
917
2,814
1997
2011
31 years
Bronson Lakeview OPC
Paw Paw
MI
—
3,835
31,564
—
3,835
31,564
35,399
3,629
31,770
2006
2015
35 years
Pro Med Center Plainwell
Plainwell
MI
—
—
697
7
—
704
704
223
481
1991
2010
35 years
Pro Med Center Richland
Richland
MI
—
233
2,267
77
233
2,344
2,577
658
1,919
1996
2010
35 years
Henry Ford Dialysis Center
Southfield
MI
—
589
3,350
—
589
3,350
3,939
381
3,558
2002
2015
35 years
Metro Health
Wyoming
MI
—
1,325
5,479
—
1,325
5,479
6,804
659
6,145
2008
2015
35 years
Spectrum Health
Wyoming
MI
—
2,463
14,353
—
2,463
14,353
16,816
1,727
15,089
2006
2015
35 years
Cogdell Duluth MOB
Duluth
MN
—
—
33,406
(19
)
—
33,387
33,387
5,162
28,225
2012
2012
35 years
Allina Health
Elk River
MN
—
1,442
7,742
54
1,442
7,796
9,238
1,058
8,180
2002
2015
35 years
Unitron Hearing
Plymouth
MN
—
2,646
8,962
5
2,646
8,967
11,613
1,511
10,102
2011
2015
29 years
HealthPartners Medical & Dental Clinics
Sartell
MN
—
2,492
15,694
49
2,503
15,732
18,235
3,787
14,448
2010
2012
35 years
Arnold Urgent Care
Arnold
MO
—
1,058
556
155
1,097
672
1,769
520
1,249
1999
2011
35 years
DePaul Health Center North
Bridgeton
MO
—
996
10,045
2,189
996
12,234
13,230
4,310
8,920
1976
2012
21 years
DePaul Health Center South
Bridgeton
MO
—
910
12,169
1,403
910
13,572
14,482
3,757
10,725
1992
2012
30 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB D
Clayton
MO
—
103
2,780
925
103
3,705
3,808
1,415
2,393
1984
2012
22 years
Fenton Urgent Care Center
Fenton
MO
—
183
2,714
364
189
3,072
3,261
1,091
2,170
2003
2011
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
305
7,445
2,286
305
9,731
10,036
2,005
8,031
1988
2012
32 years
St. Joseph Medical Mall
Kansas City
MO
—
530
9,115
608
530
9,723
10,253
2,327
7,926
1995
2012
33 years
Carondelet Medical Building
Kansas City
MO
—
745
12,437
1,800
745
14,237
14,982
3,698
11,284
1979
2012
29 years
St. Joseph Hospital West Medical Office Building II
Lake Saint Louis
MO
—
524
3,229
779
524
4,008
4,532
1,046
3,486
2005
2012
35 years
St. Joseph O'Fallon Medical Office Building
O'Fallon
MO
—
940
5,556
114
960
5,650
6,610
1,336
5,274
1992
2012
35 years
Sisters of Mercy Building
Springfield
MO
—
3,427
8,697
—
3,427
8,697
12,124
1,113
11,011
2008
2015
35 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 1
St. Charles
MO
—
503
4,336
1,220
503
5,556
6,059
2,010
4,049
1987
2012
20 years
St. Joseph Health Center Medical Building 2
St. Charles
MO
—
369
2,963
1,256
369
4,219
4,588
1,111
3,477
1999
2012
32 years
Physicians Office Center
St. Louis
MO
—
1,445
13,825
858
1,445
14,683
16,128
5,147
10,981
2003
2011
35 years
12700 Southford Road Medical Plaza
St. Louis
MO
—
595
12,584
1,607
595
14,191
14,786
4,800
9,986
1993
2011
32 years
St Anthony's MOB A
St. Louis
MO
—
409
4,687
1,369
409
6,056
6,465
2,447
4,018
1975
2011
20 years
St Anthony's MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
350
3,942
923
350
4,865
5,215
2,159
3,056
1980
2011
21 years
Lemay Urgent Care Center
St. Louis
MO
—
2,317
3,120
635
2,351
3,721
6,072
1,820
4,252
1983
2011
22 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB B
St. Louis
MO
—
119
4,161
11,075
119
15,236
15,355
1,654
13,701
1979
2012
23 years
St. Mary's Health Center MOB C
St. Louis
MO
—
136
6,018
992
136
7,010
7,146
2,127
5,019
1969
2012
20 years
University Physicians - Grants Ferry
Flowood
MS
8,815
2,796
12,125
(12
)
2,796
12,113
14,909
2,947
11,962
2010
2012
35 years
Randolph
Charlotte
NC
—
6,370
2,929
1,893
6,418
4,774
11,192
3,434
7,758
1973
2012
4 years
Mallard Crossing I
Charlotte
NC
—
3,229
2,072
673
3,269
2,705
5,974
1,703
4,271
1997
2012
25 years
Medical Arts Building
Concord
NC
—
701
11,734
1,051
701
12,785
13,486
3,924
9,562
1997
2012
31 years
171
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Gateway Medical Office Building
Concord
NC
—
1,100
9,904
629
1,100
10,533
11,633
3,220
8,413
2005
2012
35 years
Copperfield Medical Mall
Concord
NC
—
1,980
2,846
451
2,139
3,138
5,277
1,398
3,879
1989
2012
25 years
Weddington Internal & Pediatric Medicine
Concord
NC
—
574
688
30
574
718
1,292
299
993
2000
2012
27 years
Rex Wellness Center
Garner
NC
—
1,348
5,330
40
1,354
5,364
6,718
799
5,919
2003
2015
34 years
Gaston Professional Center
Gastonia
NC
—
833
24,885
2,384
833
27,269
28,102
5,947
22,155
1997
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Family Physicians
Harrisburg
NC
—
679
1,646
48
679
1,694
2,373
448
1,925
1996
2012
35 years
Harrisburg Medical Mall
Harrisburg
NC
—
1,339
2,292
246
1,339
2,538
3,877
1,010
2,867
1997
2012
27 years
Northcross
Huntersville
NC
—
623
278
73
623
351
974
228
746
1993
2012
22 years
REX Knightdale MOB & Wellness Center
Knightdale
NC
—
—
22,823
486
—
23,309
23,309
3,690
19,619
2009
2012
35 years
Midland Medical Park
Midland
NC
—
1,221
847
120
1,221
967
2,188
505
1,683
1998
2012
25 years
East Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
803
998
(2
)
803
996
1,799
370
1,429
2000
2012
33 years
Rocky Mount Kidney Center
Rocky Mount
NC
—
479
1,297
39
479
1,336
1,815
511
1,304
1990
2012
25 years
Rocky Mount Medical Park
Rocky Mount
NC
—
2,552
7,779
1,919
2,652
9,598
12,250
2,797
9,453
1991
2012
30 years
English Road Medical Center
Rocky Mount
NC
3,877
1,321
3,747
8
1,321
3,755
5,076
1,335
3,741
2002
2012
35 years
Rowan Outpatient Surgery Center
Salisbury
NC
—
1,039
5,184
(5
)
1,039
5,179
6,218
1,323
4,895
2003
2012
35 years
Trinity Health Medical Arts Clinic
Minot
ND
—
935
15,482
49
951
15,515
16,466
2,297
14,169
1995
2015
26 years
Cooper Health MOB I
Willingboro
NJ
—
1,389
2,742
(13
)
1,389
2,729
4,118
414
3,704
2010
2015
35 years
Cooper Health MOB II
Willingboro
NJ
—
594
5,638
—
594
5,638
6,232
604
5,628
2012
2015
35 years
Salem Medical
Woodstown
NJ
—
275
4,132
3
275
4,135
4,410
440
3,970
2010
2015
35 years
Carson Tahoe Specialty Medical Center
Carson City
NV
—
688
11,346
364
723
11,675
12,398
1,339
11,059
1981
2015
35 years
Carson Tahoe MOB West
Carson City
NV
—
2,862
27,519
249
2,877
27,753
30,630
3,821
26,809
2007
2015
29 years
Del E Webb Medical Plaza
Henderson
NV
—
1,028
16,993
1,515
1,028
18,508
19,536
5,153
14,383
1999
2011
35 years
Durango Medical Plaza
Las Vegas
NV
—
3,787
27,738
(3,128
)
3,677
24,720
28,397
2,841
25,556
2008
2015
35 years
The Terrace at South Meadows
Reno
NV
6,699
504
9,966
610
504
10,576
11,080
3,183
7,897
2004
2011
35 years
Albany Medical Center MOB
Albany
NY
—
321
18,389
—
321
18,389
18,710
1,684
17,026
2010
2015
35 years
St. Peter's Recovery Center
Guilderland
NY
—
1,059
9,156
—
1,059
9,156
10,215
1,127
9,088
1990
2015
35 years
Central NY Medical Center
Syracuse
NY
—
1,786
26,101
2,980
1,792
29,075
30,867
6,923
23,944
1997
2012
33 years
Northcountry MOB
Watertown
NY
—
1,320
10,799
7
1,320
10,806
12,126
1,346
10,780
2001
2015
35 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building I
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
9,632
1,948
20
11,560
11,580
4,608
6,972
1984
2007
35 years
Anderson Medical Arts Building II
Cincinnati
OH
—
—
15,123
2,282
—
17,405
17,405
6,972
10,433
2007
2007
35 years
Riverside North Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
785
8,519
1,641
785
10,160
10,945
3,470
7,475
1962
2012
25 years
Riverside South Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
586
7,298
833
610
8,107
8,717
2,567
6,150
1985
2012
27 years
340 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
10
9,443
1,001
10
10,444
10,454
2,700
7,754
1984
2012
29 years
393 East Town Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
61
4,760
320
61
5,080
5,141
1,614
3,527
1970
2012
20 years
141 South Sixth Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
80
1,113
1,119
80
2,232
2,312
551
1,761
1971
2012
14 years
Doctors West Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
414
5,362
840
414
6,202
6,616
1,655
4,961
1998
2012
35 years
Eastside Health Center
Columbus
OH
—
956
3,472
(2
)
956
3,470
4,426
1,674
2,752
1977
2012
15 years
East Main Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
440
4,771
63
440
4,834
5,274
1,270
4,004
2006
2012
35 years
Heart Center Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
1,063
12,140
280
1,063
12,420
13,483
3,377
10,106
2004
2012
35 years
172
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
Wilkins Medical Office Building
Columbus
OH
—
123
18,062
343
123
18,405
18,528
3,968
14,560
2002
2012
35 years
Grady Medical Office Building
Delaware
OH
—
239
2,263
370
239
2,633
2,872
940
1,932
1991
2012
25 years
Dublin Northwest Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
—
342
3,278
234
342
3,512
3,854
1,093
2,761
2001
2012
34 years
Preserve III Medical Office Building
Dublin
OH
—
2,449
7,025
(66
)
2,449
6,959
9,408
1,883
7,525
2006
2012
35 years
Zanesville Surgery Center
Zanesville
OH
—
172
9,403
—
172
9,403
9,575
2,126
7,449
2000
2011
35 years
Dialysis Center
Zanesville
OH
—
534
855
81
534
936
1,470
541
929
1960
2011
21 years
Genesis Children's Center
Zanesville
OH
—
538
3,781
—
538
3,781
4,319
1,184
3,135
2006
2011
30 years
Medical Arts Building I
Zanesville
OH
—
429
2,405
520
436
2,918
3,354
1,200
2,154
1970
2011
20 years
Medical Arts Building II
Zanesville
OH
—
485
6,013
835
510
6,823
7,333
2,780
4,553
1995
2011
25 years
Medical Arts Building III
Zanesville
OH
—
94
1,248
—
94
1,248
1,342
505
837
1970
2011
25 years
Primecare Building
Zanesville
OH
—
130
1,344
648
130
1,992
2,122
776
1,346
1978
2011
20 years
Outpatient Rehabilitation Building
Zanesville
OH
—
82
1,541
—
82
1,541
1,623
521
1,102
1985
2011
28 years
Radiation Oncology Building
Zanesville
OH
—
105
1,201
—
105
1,201
1,306
477
829
1988
2011
25 years
Healthplex
Zanesville
OH
—
2,488
15,849
648
2,508
16,477
18,985
5,213
13,772
1990
2011
32 years
Physicians Pavilion
Zanesville
OH
—
422
6,297
1,425
422
7,722
8,144
2,746
5,398
1990
2011
25 years
Zanesville Northside Pharmacy
Zanesville
OH
—
42
635
—
42
635
677
223
454
1985
2011
28 years
Bethesda Campus MOB III
Zanesville
OH
—
188
1,137
141
199
1,267
1,466
482
984
1978
2011
25 years
Tuality 7th Avenue Medical Plaza
Hillsboro
OR
18,230
1,516
24,638
1,387
1,533
26,008
27,541
6,694
20,847
2003
2011
35 years
Professional Office Building I
Chester
PA
—
—
6,283
2,410
—
8,693
8,693
4,178
4,515
1978
2004
30 years
DCMH Medical Office Building
Drexel Hill
PA
—
—
10,424
1,599
—
12,023
12,023
6,223
5,800
1984
2004
30 years
Pinnacle Health
Harrisburg
PA
—
2,574
16,767
407
2,674
17,074
19,748
2,050
17,698
2002
2015
35 years
Lancaster Rehabilitation Hospital
Lancaster
PA
—
959
16,610
(16
)
959
16,594
17,553
3,815
13,738
2007
2012
35 years
Lancaster ASC MOB
Lancaster
PA
—
593
17,117
433
593
17,550
18,143
4,469
13,674
2007
2012
35 years
St. Joseph Medical Office Building
Reading
PA
—
—
10,823
811
—
11,634
11,634
3,689
7,945
2006
2010
35 years
Crozer - Keystone MOB I
Springfield
PA
—
9,130
47,078
—
9,130
47,078
56,208
6,259
49,949
1996
2015
35 years
Crozer-Keystone MOB II
Springfield
PA
—
5,178
6,523
—
5,178
6,523
11,701
922
10,779
1998
2015
25 years
Doylestown Health & Wellness Center
Warrington
PA
—
4,452
17,383
960
4,497
18,298
22,795
4,799
17,996
2001
2012
34 years
Roper Medical Office Building
Charleston
SC
7,890
127
14,737
3,582
127
18,319
18,446
4,913
13,533
1990
2012
28 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Charleston)
Charleston
SC
—
447
3,946
621
447
4,567
5,014
1,369
3,645
2003
2012
35 years
Providence MOB I
Columbia
SC
—
225
4,274
869
225
5,143
5,368
2,105
3,263
1979
2012
18 years
Providence MOB II
Columbia
SC
—
122
1,834
172
150
1,978
2,128
854
1,274
1985
2012
18 years
Providence MOB III
Columbia
SC
—
766
4,406
797
766
5,203
5,969
1,635
4,334
1990
2012
23 years
One Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
210
7,939
1,152
214
9,087
9,301
3,422
5,879
1984
2012
19 years
Three Medical Park
Columbia
SC
—
40
10,650
1,411
40
12,061
12,101
3,840
8,261
1988
2012
25 years
St. Francis Millennium Medical Office Building
Greenville
SC
14,707
—
13,062
10,618
30
23,650
23,680
9,808
13,872
2009
2009
35 years
200 Andrews
Greenville
SC
—
789
2,014
362
803
2,362
3,165
1,242
1,923
1994
2012
29 years
St. Francis CMOB
Greenville
SC
—
501
7,661
895
501
8,556
9,057
2,083
6,974
2001
2012
35 years
St. Francis Outpatient Surgery Center
Greenville
SC
—
1,007
16,538
889
1,007
17,427
18,434
4,449
13,985
2001
2012
35 years
173
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
St. Francis Professional Medical Center
Greenville
SC
—
342
6,337
1,336
371
7,644
8,015
2,211
5,804
1984
2012
24 years
St. Francis Women's
Greenville
SC
—
322
4,877
611
322
5,488
5,810
2,186
3,624
1991
2012
24 years
St. Francis Medical Plaza (Greenville)
Greenville
SC
—
88
5,876
1,028
98
6,894
6,992
1,995
4,997
1998
2012
24 years
Irmo Professional MOB
Irmo
SC
—
1,726
5,414
258
1,726
5,672
7,398
1,945
5,453
2004
2011
35 years
River Hills Medical Plaza
Little River
SC
—
1,406
1,813
187
1,406
2,000
3,406
736
2,670
1999
2012
27 years
Mount Pleasant Medical Office Longpoint
Mount Pleasant
SC
—
670
4,455
186
632
4,679
5,311
1,952
3,359
2001
2012
34 years
Mary Black Westside Medical Office Bldg
Spartanburg
SC
—
291
5,057
516
300
5,564
5,864
1,618
4,246
1991
2012
31 years
Spartanburg ASC
Spartanburg
SC
—
1,333
15,756
—
1,333
15,756
17,089
1,521
15,568
2002
2015
35 years
Spartanburg Regional MOB
Spartanburg
SC
—
207
17,963
550
286
18,434
18,720
1,995
16,725
1986
2015
35 years
Wellmont Blue Ridge MOB
Bristol
TN
—
999
5,027
32
999
5,059
6,058
628
5,430
2001
2015
35 years
Health Park Medical Office Building
Chattanooga
TN
5,955
2,305
8,949
51
2,305
9,000
11,305
2,317
8,988
2004
2012
35 years
Peerless Crossing Medical Center
Cleveland
TN
—
1,217
6,464
13
1,217
6,477
7,694
1,577
6,117
2006
2012
35 years
St. Mary's Clinton Professional Office Building
Clinton
TN
—
298
618
6
298
624
922
145
777
1988
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Farragut MOB
Farragut
TN
—
221
2,719
137
221
2,856
3,077
351
2,726
1997
2015
39 years
Medical Center Physicians Tower
Jackson
TN
13,344
549
27,074
50
598
27,075
27,673
6,744
20,929
2010
2012
35 years
St. Mary's Physician Professional Office Building
Knoxville
TN
—
138
3,144
129
138
3,273
3,411
509
2,902
1981
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Magdalene Clarke Tower
Knoxville
TN
—
69
4,153
11
69
4,164
4,233
583
3,650
1972
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Medical Office Building
Knoxville
TN
—
136
359
31
136
390
526
124
402
1976
2015
39 years
St. Mary's Ambulatory Surgery Center
Knoxville
TN
—
129
1,012
—
129
1,012
1,141
221
920
1999
2015
24 years
Texas Clinic at Arlington
Arlington
TX
—
2,781
24,515
91
2,781
24,606
27,387
2,680
24,707
2010
2015
35 years
Seton Medical Park Tower
Austin
TX
—
805
41,527
2,803
1,329
43,806
45,135
8,799
36,336
1968
2012
35 years
Seton Northwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
444
22,632
2,809
444
25,441
25,885
5,188
20,697
1988
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza
Austin
TX
—
294
5,311
241
294
5,552
5,846
1,133
4,713
2004
2012
35 years
Seton Southwest Health Plaza II
Austin
TX
—
447
10,154
84
447
10,238
10,685
2,124
8,561
2009
2012
35 years
BioLife Sciences Building
Denton
TX
—
1,036
6,576
—
1,036
6,576
7,612
817
6,795
2010
2015
35 years
East Houston MOB, LLC
Houston
TX
—
356
2,877
702
328
3,607
3,935
2,084
1,851
1982
2011
15 years
East Houston Medical Plaza
Houston
TX
—
671
426
535
671
961
1,632
847
785
1982
2011
11 years
Memorial Hermann
Houston
TX
—
822
14,307
—
822
14,307
15,129
1,451
13,678
2012
2015
35 years
Scott & White Healthcare
Kingsland
TX
—
534
5,104
—
534
5,104
5,638
593
5,045
2012
2015
35 years
Odessa Regional MOB
Odessa
TX
—
121
8,935
—
121
8,935
9,056
942
8,114
2008
2015
35 years
Legacy Heart Center
Plano
TX
—
3,081
8,890
8
3,081
8,898
11,979
1,148
10,831
2005
2015
35 years
Seton Williamson Medical Plaza
Round Rock
TX
—
—
15,074
586
—
15,660
15,660
4,849
10,811
2008
2010
35 years
Sunnyvale Medical Plaza
Sunnyvale
TX
—
1,186
15,397
397
1,215
15,765
16,980
1,834
15,146
2009
2015
35 years
Texarkana ASC
Texarkana
TX
—
814
5,903
—
814
5,903
6,717
785
5,932
1994
2015
30 years
Spring Creek Medical Plaza
Tomball
TX
—
2,165
8,212
16
2,165
8,228
10,393
888
9,505
2006
2015
35 years
251 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,158
12,078
(3,777
)
1,163
8,296
9,459
2,616
6,843
2006
2011
35 years
174
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
253 Medical Center
Webster
TX
—
1,181
11,862
(3,820
)
1,181
8,042
9,223
2,460
6,763
2009
2011
35 years
MRMC MOB I
Mechanicsville
VA
—
1,669
7,024
433
1,669
7,457
9,126
2,694
6,432
1993
2012
31 years
Henrico MOB
Richmond
VA
—
968
6,189
1,209
968
7,398
8,366
2,677
5,689
1976
2011
25 years
St. Mary's MOB North (Floors 6 & 7)
Richmond
VA
—
227
2,961
633
227
3,594
3,821
1,257
2,564
1968
2012
22 years
Virginia Urology Center
Richmond
VA
—
3,822
16,127
—
3,822
16,127
19,949
1,899
18,050
2004
2015
35 years
St. Francis Cancer Center
Richmond
VA
—
654
18,331
23
657
18,351
19,008
1,956
17,052
2006
2015
35 years
Bonney Lake Medical Office Building
Bonney Lake
WA
10,203
5,176
14,375
165
5,176
14,540
19,716
3,820
15,896
2011
2012
35 years
Good Samaritan Medical Office Building
Puyallup
WA
13,220
781
30,368
692
801
31,040
31,841
6,620
25,221
2011
2012
35 years
Holy Family Hospital Central MOB
Spokane
WA
—
—
19,085
260
—
19,345
19,345
3,181
16,164
2007
2012
35 years
Physician's Pavilion
Vancouver
WA
—
1,411
32,939
957
1,431
33,876
35,307
8,662
26,645
2001
2011
35 years
Administration Building
Vancouver
WA
—
296
7,856
—
296
7,856
8,152
2,013
6,139
1972
2011
35 years
Medical Center Physician's Building
Vancouver
WA
—
1,225
31,246
2,791
1,251
34,011
35,262
8,191
27,071
1980
2011
35 years
Memorial MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
663
12,626
750
690
13,349
14,039
3,307
10,732
1999
2011
35 years
Salmon Creek MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,325
9,238
—
1,325
9,238
10,563
2,340
8,223
1994
2011
35 years
Fisher's Landing MOB
Vancouver
WA
—
1,590
5,420
—
1,590
5,420
7,010
1,654
5,356
1995
2011
34 years
Columbia Medical Plaza Vancouver
Vancouver
WA
—
281
5,266
323
331
5,539
5,870
1,465
4,405
1991
2011
35 years
Appleton Heart Institute
Appleton
WI
—
—
7,775
31
—
7,806
7,806
2,126
5,680
2003
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices West
Appleton
WI
—
—
5,756
85
—
5,841
5,841
1,602
4,239
1989
2010
39 years
Appleton Medical Offices South
Appleton
WI
—
—
9,058
185
—
9,243
9,243
2,671
6,572
1983
2010
39 years
Brookfield Clinic
Brookfield
WI
—
2,638
4,093
—
2,638
4,093
6,731
1,295
5,436
1999
2011
35 years
Lakeshore Medical Clinic - Franklin
Franklin
WI
—
1,973
7,579
65
2,029
7,588
9,617
940
8,677
2008
2015
34 years
Lakeshore Medical Clinic - Greenfield
Greenfield
WI
—
1,223
13,387
10
1,223
13,397
14,620
1,373
13,247
2010
2015
35 years
Aurora Health Care - Hartford
Hartford
WI
—
3,706
22,019
—
3,706
22,019
25,725
2,546
23,179
2006
2015
35 years
Hartland Clinic
Hartland
WI
—
321
5,050
—
321
5,050
5,371
1,361
4,010
1994
2011
35 years
Aurora Healthcare - Kenosha
Kenosha
WI
—
7,546
19,155
—
7,546
19,155
26,701
2,263
24,438
2014
2015
35 years
Univ of Wisconsin Health
Monona
WI
—
678
8,017
—
678
8,017
8,695
1,011
7,684
2011
2015
35 years
Theda Clark Medical Center Office Pavilion
Neenah
WI
—
—
7,080
747
—
7,827
7,827
2,008
5,819
1993
2010
39 years
Aylward Medical Building Condo Floors 3 & 4
Neenah
WI
—
—
4,462
95
—
4,557
4,557
1,330
3,227
2006
2010
39 years
Aurora Health Care - Neenah
Neenah
WI
—
2,033
9,072
—
2,033
9,072
11,105
1,126
9,979
2006
2015
35 years
New Berlin Clinic
New Berlin
WI
—
678
7,121
—
678
7,121
7,799
2,062
5,737
1999
2011
35 years
United Healthcare - Onalaska
Onalaska
WI
—
4,623
5,527
—
4,623
5,527
10,150
891
9,259
1995
2015
35 years
WestWood Health & Fitness
Pewaukee
WI
—
823
11,649
—
823
11,649
12,472
3,403
9,069
1997
2011
35 years
Aurora Health Care - Two Rivers
Two Rivers
WI
—
5,638
25,308
—
5,638
25,308
30,946
2,950
27,996
2006
2015
35 years
Watertown Clinic
Watertown
WI
—
166
3,234
—
166
3,234
3,400
841
2,559
2003
2011
35 years
Southside Clinic
Waukesha
WI
—
218
5,273
—
218
5,273
5,491
1,389
4,102
1997
2011
35 years
Rehabilitation Hospital
Waukesha
WI
—
372
15,636
—
372
15,636
16,008
3,608
12,400
2008
2011
35 years
United Healthcare - Wauwatosa
Wawatosa
WI
—
8,012
15,992
—
8,012
15,992
24,004
2,284
21,720
1995
2015
35 years
175
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
BSG CS, LLC
Waunakee
WI
—
1,060
—
(134
)
926
—
926
—
926
N/A
2012
N/A
TOTAL FOR MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
350,898
389,589
4,108,450
249,979
392,718
4,355,300
4,748,018
950,558
3,797,460
LIFE SCIENCE AND INNOVATION CENTERS
100 College Street
New Haven
CT
—
2,706
186,570
5,985
2,706
192,555
195,261
5,311
189,950
2013
2016
59 years
300 George Street
New Haven
CT
—
2,262
122,144
3,972
2,262
126,116
128,378
3,805
124,573
2014
2016
50 years
Univ. of Miami Life Science and Technology Park
Miami
FL
—
2,249
87,019
4,603
2,249
91,622
93,871
3,204
90,667
2014
2016
53 years
IIT
Chicago
IL
—
30
55,620
67
30
55,687
55,717
1,784
53,933
2006
2016
46 years
University of Maryland BioPark I Unit 1
Baltimore
MD
—
113
25,199
789
113
25,988
26,101
813
25,288
2005
2016
50 years
University of Maryland BioPark II
Baltimore
MD
—
61
91,764
3,243
61
95,007
95,068
3,446
91,622
2007
2016
50 years
University of Maryland BioPark Garage
Baltimore
MD
—
77
4,677
345
77
5,022
5,099
267
4,832
2007
2016
29 years
Tributary Street
Baltimore
MD
—
4,015
15,905
597
4,015
16,502
20,517
770
19,747
1998
2016
45 years
Beckley Street
Baltimore
MD
—
2,813
13,481
574
2,813
14,055
16,868
675
16,193
1999
2016
45 years
University of Maryland BioPark III
Baltimore
MD
—
980
34
—
980
34
1,014
—
1,014
CIP
CIP
CIP
Heritage at 4240
Saint Louis
MO
—
403
47,125
325
452
47,401
47,853
2,104
45,749
2013
2016
45 years
Cortex 1
Saint Louis
MO
—
631
26,543
1,094
631
27,637
28,268
1,301
26,967
2005
2016
50 years
BRDG Park
Saint Louis
MO
—
606
37,083
1,580
606
38,663
39,269
1,208
38,061
2009
2016
52 years
4220 Duncan Avenue
St Louis
MO
—
—
—
14,921
1,871
13,050
14,921
—
14,921
N/A
2016
N/A
311 South Sarah Street
St. Louis
MO
—
7,567
(1,775
)
—
7,567
(1,775
)
5,792
6
5,786
CIP
CIP
CIP
4300 Duncan
St. Louis
MO
—
2,818
46,749
—
2,818
46,749
49,567
130
49,437
2008
2017
35 years
Weston Parkway
Cary
NC
—
1,372
6,535
1,018
1,372
7,553
8,925
285
8,640
1990
2016
50 years
Patriot Drive
Durham
NC
—
1,960
10,749
373
1,960
11,122
13,082
465
12,617
2010
2016
50 years
Chesterfield
Durham
NC
—
3,266
58,020
—
3,266
58,020
61,286
841
60,445
2017
2017
60 years
Paramount Parkway
Morrisville
NC
—
1,016
19,794
617
1,016
20,411
21,427
869
20,558
1999
2016
45 years
Wake 90
Winston-Salem
NC
—
2,752
79,949
105
2,752
80,054
82,806
3,196
79,610
2013
2016
40 years
Wake 91
Winston-Salem
NC
—
1,729
73,690
—
1,729
73,690
75,419
2,395
73,024
2011
2016
50 years
Wake 60
Winston-Salem
NC
15,000
1,243
83,414
1,868
1,243
85,282
86,525
3,320
83,205
2016
2016
35 years
Bailey Power Plant
Winston-Salem
NC
—
1,930
33,395
—
1,930
33,395
35,325
—
35,325
2017
2017
35 years
Hershey Center Unit 1
Hummelstown
PA
—
813
23,699
786
813
24,485
25,298
918
24,380
2007
2016
50 years
3737 Market Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
40
141,981
5,711
40
147,692
147,732
3,950
143,782
2014
2016
54 years
3711 Market Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
12,320
69,278
2,597
12,320
71,875
84,195
2,342
81,853
2008
2016
48 years
3750 Lancaster Avenue
Philadelphia
PA
—
—
205
—
—
205
205
—
205
CIP
CIP
CIP
3675 Market Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
11,370
53,539
—
11,370
53,539
64,909
—
64,909
CIP
CIP
CIP
3701 Filbert Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
—
1,080
—
—
1,080
1,080
—
1,080
CIP
CIP
CIP
115 North 38th Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
—
289
—
—
289
289
—
289
CIP
CIP
CIP
225 North 38th Street
Philadelphia
PA
—
—
2,460
—
—
2,460
2,460
—
2,460
CIP
CIP
CIP
South Street Landing
Providence
RI
—
6,358
112,036
—
6,358
112,036
118,394
997
117,397
2017
2017
45 years
176
Location
Initial Cost to Company
Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period
Property Name
City
State /
Province
Encumbrances
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Costs
Capitalized
Subsequent
to Acquisition
Land and
Improvements
Buildings and
Improvements
Total
Accumulated
Depreciation
NBV
Year of
Construction
Year
Acquired
Life on
Which
Depreciation
in Income
Statement
is Computed
2/3 Davol Square
Providence
RI
—
4,537
6,886
—
4,537
6,886
11,423
660
10,763
2005
2017
15 years
One Ship Street
Providence
RI
—
1,943
1,734
—
1,943
1,734
3,677
58
3,619
1980
2017
25 years
Brown Academic/R&D Building
Providence
RI
—
—
—
9,834
—
9,834
9,834
—
9,834
2007
2016
55 years
IRP I
Norfolk
VA
—
60
20,084
607
60
20,691
20,751
720
20,031
2007
2016
55 years
IRP II
Norfolk
VA
—
69
21,255
748
69
22,003
22,072
715
21,357
2007
2016
55 years
Wexford Biotech 8
Richmond
VA
—
2,615
85,496
—
2,615
85,496
88,111
474
87,637
2012
2017
35 years
TOTAL FOR LIFE SCIENCE AND INNOVATION CENTERS
14,999
82,724
1,663,706
62,359
84,644
1,724,145
1,808,789
47,029
1,761,760
TOTAL OFFICE BUILDINGS
365,897
472,313
5,772,156
312,338
477,362
6,079,445
6,556,807
997,587
5,559,220
TOTAL FOR ALL PROPERTIES
$
1,308,564
$
2,140,863
$
21,575,402
$
951,573
$
2,147,621
$
22,520,217
$
24,667,838
$
4,785,395
$
19,882,443
177
VENTAS, INC.
SCHEDULE IV
MORTGAGE LOANS ON REAL ESTATE
December 31, 2017
Location
Number of RE Assets
Interest Rate
Fixed / Variable
Maturity Date
Monthly Debt Service
Face Value
Net Book Value
Prior Liens
(In thousands)
First Mortgages
Multiple
3
9.77%
V
6/30/2019
$
137
$
17,023
$
17,023
$
—
Ohio
5
8.13%
V
10/1/2021
535
78,448
78,448
—
Mezzanine Loans
Multiple
31
9.95%
F/V
2/6/2021
1,091
121,699
121,699
1,420,844
Multiple*
179
8.27%
F/V
12/9/2019
2,138
290,099
290,099
1,560,415
Construction Loans
Colorado
1
8.75%
V
2/6/2021
437
59,045
58,606
—
Total
$
4,338
$
566,314
$
565,875
$
2,981,259
* The variable portion of this investment has a maturity date of 12/9/2018, with extension options to 12/9/2019.
Mortgage Loan Reconciliation
2017
2016
2015
(In thousands)
Beginning Balance
$
634,969
$
784,821
$
747,456
Additions:
New Loans
—
140,000
88,648
Construction Draws
—
13,403
53,708
Total additions
—
153,403
142,356
Deductions:
Principal Repayments
(68,655
)
(303,255
)
(99,467
)
Spin Off
—
—
(5,524
)
Total deductions
(68,655
)
(303,255
)
(104,991
)
Ending Balance
$
566,314
$
634,969
$
784,821
178
ITEM 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
ITEM 9A.
Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by Rules 13a-15(b) and 15d-15(b) of the Exchange Act, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
December 31, 2017
. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) were effective as of
December 31, 2017
, at the reasonable assurance level.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The information set forth under “Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting” and “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial Reporting” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference into this Item 9A.
Internal Control Changes
During the fourth quarter of
2017
, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B.
Other Information
Not applicable.
PART III
ITEM 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
The information required by this Item 10 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Proposals Requiring Your Vote—Proposal 1: Election of Directors,” “Our Executive Officers,” “Securities Ownership—Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Corporate Governance—Governance Policies” and “Audit and Compliance Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2018
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than
April 30, 2018
.
ITEM 11.
Executive Compensation
The information required by this Item 11 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Executive Compensation,” “Non-Employee Director Compensation” and “Executive Compensation Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2018
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than
April 30, 2018
.
ITEM 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
The information required by this Item 12 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Equity Compensation Plan Information” and “Securities Ownership” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2018
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than
April 30, 2018
.
179
ITEM 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
The information required by this Item 13 is incorporated by reference to the material under the headings “Corporate Governance—Transactions with Related Persons,” “Our Board of Directors—Director Independence,” “Audit and Compliance Committee,” “Executive Compensation Committee” and “Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2018
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than
April 30, 2018
.
ITEM 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The information required by this Item 14 is incorporated by reference to the material under the heading “Proposals Requiring Your Vote—Proposal 2: Ratification of the Selection of KPMG LLP as Our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for Fiscal Year
2018
” in our definitive Proxy Statement for the
2018
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we will file with the SEC not later than
April 30, 2018
.
180
PART IV
ITEM 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules
The following documents have been included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
Page
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
78
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2017 and 2016
81
Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
82
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
83
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
84
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
85
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
87
Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
142
Schedule III — Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
143
Schedule IV — Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
178
All other schedules have been omitted because they are inapplicable, not required or the information is included elsewhere in the Consolidated Financial Statements or notes thereto.
Exhibits
The exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K which are filed with this report are listed in the Exhibit Index.
181
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date:
February 9, 2018
VENTAS, INC.
By:
/s/ DEBRA A. CAFARO
Debra A. Cafaro
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
182
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ DEBRA A. CAFARO
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
February 9, 2018
Debra A. Cafaro
/s/ ROBERT F. PROBST
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
February 9, 2018
Robert F. Probst
/s/ GREGORY R. LIEBBE
Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
February 9, 2018
Gregory R. Liebbe
/s/ MELODY C. BARNES
Director
February 9, 2018
Melody C. Barnes
/s/ JAY M. GELLERT
Director
February 9, 2018
Jay M. Gellert
/s/ RICHARD I. GILCHRIST
Director
February 9, 2018
Richard I. Gilchrist
/s/ MATTHEW J. LUSTIG
Director
February 9, 2018
Matthew J. Lustig
/s/ ROXANNE M. MARTINO
Director
February 9, 2018
Roxanne M. Martino
/s/WALTER C. RAKOWICH
Director
February 9, 2018
Walter C. Rakowich
/s/ ROBERT D. REED
Director
February 9, 2018
Robert D. Reed
/s/ GLENN J. RUFRANO
Director
February 9, 2018
Glenn J. Rufrano
/s/ JAMES D. SHELTON
Director
February 9, 2018
James D. Shelton
183
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
2.1
Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 2.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
3.1
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 3.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, filed on August 5, 2011, File No. 001-10989.
3.2
Fifth Amended and Restated Bylaws, as amended, of Ventas, Inc.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 3.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 11, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
4.1
Specimen common stock certificate.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, filed on February 12, 2016, File No. 001-10989.
4.2
Indenture dated as of September 19, 2006 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuer(s), the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.9 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3, filed on April 7, 2006, File No. 333-133115.
4.3
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 17, 2011 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.750% Senior Notes due 2021.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 20, 2011, File No. 001-10989.
4.4
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of February 10, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on February 14, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
4.5
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.000% Senior Notes due 2019.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 18, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
4.6
Seventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of August 3, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.250% Senior Notes due 2022.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, filed on October 26, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
4.7
Eighth Supplemental Indenture dated as of December 13, 2012 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.000% Senior Notes due 2018.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 13, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
4.8
Ninth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 7, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.450% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Registration Statement on Form 8-A, filed on March 7, 2013, File No. 001-10989.
184
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.9
Tenth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 19, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership and Ventas Capital Corporation, as Issuers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 2.700% Senior Notes due 2020.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 19, 2013, File No. 001-10989.
4.10
Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein, as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.10 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, filed on February 14, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
4.11
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 26, 2013 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 5.700% Senior Notes due 2043.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 26, 2013, File No. 001-10989.
4.12
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 17, 2014 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.750% Senior Notes due 2024.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on April 17, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
4.13
Fifth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.500% Senior Notes due 2025.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
4.14
Sixth Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 14, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.375% Senior Notes due 2045.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 14, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
4.15
Indenture dated as of August 19, 1997 by and between Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and The Bank of New York, as Trustee, relating to the 6.90% Series C Medium-Term Notes due 2037 and the 6.59% Series C Medium-Term Notes due 2038.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 1.2 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 19, 1997, File No. 001-09028 (see Exhibit 1.2 of complete submission text file).
4.16
Supplemental Indenture dated July 1, 2011 among Nationwide Health Properties, Inc., Needles Acquisition LLC, and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as successor Trustee, relating to the 6.90% Series C Medium-Term Notes due 2037 and the 6.59% Series C Medium-Term Notes due 2038.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.17 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, filed on February 14, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
4.17
Indenture dated as September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Canadian Finance Limited, the Guarantors parties thereto from time to time and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, filed on October 24, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
4.18
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.00% Senior Notes, Series A due 2019.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, filed on October 24, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
185
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
4.19
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 24, 2014 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes, Series B due 2024.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.3 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, filed on October 24, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
4.20
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 13, 2015 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 3.30% Senior Notes, Series C due 2022.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.24 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed on February 13, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
4.21
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 1, 2017 by and among Ventas Canada Finance Limited, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and Computershare Trust Company of Canada, as Trustee, relating to the 2.55% Senior Notes, Series D due 2023.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2017, filed on July 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
4.22
Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas, Inc., Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, the Guarantors named therein as Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
4.23
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of July 16, 2015 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 4.125% Senior Notes due 2026.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on July 16, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
4.24
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 2, 2016 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.125% Senior Notes due 2023.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 2, 2016, File No. 001-10989.
4.25
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of September 21, 2016 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.250% Senior Notes due 2026.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 21, 2016, File No. 001-10989.
4.26
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 29, 2017 by and among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, as Issuer, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, relating to the 3.100% Senior Notes due 2023 and the 3.850% Senior Notes due 2027.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 29, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.1
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 3.5 to our Registration Statement on Form S-4, as amended, filed on May 29, 2002, File No. 333-89312.
10.2
Second Amended and Restated Credit and Guaranty Agreement, dated as of April 25, 2017, among Ventas Realty, Limited Partnership, Ventas SSL Ontario II, Inc., Ventas SSL Ontario III, Inc., Ventas Canada Finance Limited, Ventas UK Finance, Inc., and Ventas Euro Finance, LLC, as Borrowers, Ventas, Inc., as Guarantor, the Lenders identified therein, and Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, and Alternative Currency Fronting Lender, Bank of America, N.A. and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Swing Line Lenders and L/C Issuers.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.3.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
186
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.3
Tax Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
10.4
Employee Matters Agreement dated as of August 17, 2015 by and between Ventas, Inc. and Care Capital Properties, Inc.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on August 21, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
10.5*
Ventas, Inc. 2004 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.16.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, filed on March 1, 2005, File No. 33-107942.
10.6.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Incentive Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.6.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.15.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on February 22, 2007, File No. 001-10989.
10.6.3*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement—2006 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.15.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on February 22, 2007, File No. 001-10989.
10.7.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2006 Stock Plan for Directors, as amended.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012, filed on April 27, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
10.7.2*
Form of Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.11.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.7.3*
Form of Amendment to Stock Option Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012, filed on April 27, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
10.7.4*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement—2006 Stock Plan for Directors.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.11.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.1*
Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on May 23, 2012, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.2*
First Amendment to the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.7 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.3*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.6.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed February 13, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.4*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Employees) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.6.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, filed on February 13, 2015, File No. 001-10989.
187
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.8.5*
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.4 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.8.6*
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.5 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.8.7*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Directors) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.6 to our Registration Form on S-8, filed on August 7, 2012, File No. 333-183121.
10.8.8*
Form of Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.8 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.9*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.9 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.10*
Form of Transition Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.10 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.11*
Form of Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Non-CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.11 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.12*
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Non-CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.12 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.8.13*
Form of Transition Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Non-CEO) under the Ventas, Inc. 2012 Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.10.13 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, filed on April 28, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.9.1*
Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended and restated on December 7, 2017.
Filed herewith.
10.9.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Executive Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended and restated on December 7, 2017.
Filed herewith.
10.10.1*
Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.13.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.10.2*
Deferral Election Form under the Ventas Nonemployee Directors’ Deferred Stock Compensation Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.13.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.11.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Appendix B to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. definitive Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting, filed on March 24, 2005, File No. 001-09028.
10.11.2*
First Amendment to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. 2005 Performance Incentive Plan, dated October 28, 2008.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
188
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.12.1*
Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, filed on May 4, 2006, File No. 001-09028.
10.12.2*
Amendment dated October 28, 2008 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Retirement Plan for Directors, as amended and restated on April 20, 2006.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.9 to the Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 3, 2008, File No. 001-09028.
10.13*
Second Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and Debra A. Cafaro.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011, File No. 001-10989.
10.14.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of July 31, 1998 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.15.2.1 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, filed on February 26, 2003, File No. 001-10989.
10.14.2*
Amendment dated as of September 30, 1999 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.15.2.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, filed on February 26, 2003, File No. 001-10989.
10.14.3*
Amendment dated as of March 19, 2007 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 23, 2007, File No. 001-10989.
10.14.4*
Amendment dated as of December 31, 2008 to Employment Agreement between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.15.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
10.14.5*
Amended and Restated Change-in-Control Severance Agreement dated as of March 22, 2011 between Ventas, Inc. and T. Richard Riney.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on March 24, 2011, File No. 001-10989.
10.15.1*
Employment Agreement dated as of June 22, 2010 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, filed on July 30, 2010, File No. 001-10989.
10.15.2*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated June 17, 2015 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on June 23, 2015, File No., 001-10989.
10.15.3*
Employment Transition Agreement dated as of July 25, 2017 between Ventas, Inc. and Todd W. Lillibridge.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2017, filed on October 27, 2017, File No. 001-10989.
10.16.1*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated as of October 21, 2013 between Ventas, Inc. and John D. Cobb.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, filed on February 18, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
10.16.2*
Amendment dated December 8, 2017 to Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated as of October 21, 2013 between Ventas, Inc. and John D. Cobb.
Filed herewith.
10.17.1*
Offer Letter dated September 16, 2014 from Ventas, Inc. to Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
10.17.2*
Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated September 16, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Robert F. Probst.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on September 29, 2014, File No. 001-10989.
189
Exhibit
Number
Description of Document
Location of Document
10.17.3*
Amendment dated December 8, 2017 to Employee Protection and Noncompetition Agreement dated as of September 16, 2014 between Ventas, Inc. and Robert F. Probst.
Filed herewith.
10.18*
Ventas Employee and Director Stock Purchase Plan, as amended.
Incorporated by reference herein. Previously filed as Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, filed on February 27, 2009, File No. 001-10989.
12
Statement Regarding Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
Filed herewith.
21
Subsidiaries of Ventas, Inc.
Filed herewith.
23
Consent of KPMG LLP.
Filed herewith.
31.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
31.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Exchange Act.
Filed herewith.
32.1
Certification of Debra A. Cafaro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
32.2
Certification of Robert F. Probst, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. 1350.
Filed herewith.
101
Interactive Data File.
Filed herewith.
* Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit pursuant to Item 15(b) of Form 10-K.
190
ITEM 16.
Form 10-K Summary
None.
191