XML 47 R24.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.10.0.1

Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Contingencies | Contingencies The majority of the Company’s revenues are from government programs and may be subject to adjustment as a result of: (i) examination by government agencies or contractors, for which the resolution of any matters raised may take extended periods of time to finalize; (ii) differing interpretations of government regulations by different Medicare contractors or regulatory authorities; (iii) differing opinions regarding a patient’s medical diagnosis or the medical necessity of services provided; and (iv) retroactive applications or interpretations of governmental requirements. In addition, the Company’s revenues from commercial payors may be subject to adjustment as a result of potential claims for refunds, as a result of government actions or as a result of other claims by commercial payors. The Company operates in a highly regulated industry and is a party to various lawsuits, claims, qui tam suits, governmental investigations and audits (including investigations resulting from its obligation to self-report suspected violations of law) and other legal proceedings. The Company records accruals for certain legal proceedings and regulatory matters to the extent that the Company determines an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2018, and December 31, 2017, the Company’s total recorded accruals, including DMG, with respect to legal proceedings and regulatory matters, net of anticipated third party recoveries, were immaterial. While these accruals reflect the Company’s best estimate of the probable loss for those matters as of the dates of those accruals, the recorded amounts may differ materially from the actual amount of the losses for those matters, and any anticipated third party recoveries for any such losses may not ultimately be recoverable. Additionally, in some cases, no estimate of the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, if any, can be made because of the inherently unpredictable nature of legal proceedings and regulatory matters, which also may be impacted by various factors, including that they may involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages or may involve fines, penalties or non-monetary remedies; present novel legal theories or legal uncertainties; involve disputed facts; represent a shift in regulatory policy; are in the early stages of the proceedings; or result in a change of business practices. Further, there may be various levels of judicial review available to the Company in connection with any such proceeding. The following is a description of certain lawsuits, claims, governmental investigations and audits and other legal proceedings to which the Company is subject. Inquiries by the Federal Government and Certain Related Civil Proceedings 2016 U.S. Attorney Texas Investigation: In early February 2016, the Company announced that its pharmacy services’ wholly-owned subsidiary, DaVita Rx, LLC (DaVita Rx), received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas. The government is conducting a federal False Claims Act (FCA) investigation concerning allegations that DaVita Rx presented or caused to be presented false claims for payment to the government for prescription medications, as well as an investigation into the Company’s relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers. The CID covers the period from January 1, 2006 through the present. In connection with the Company’s ongoing efforts working with the government, the Company learned that a qui tam complaint had been filed covering some of the issues in the CID and practices that had been identified by the Company in a self-disclosure filed with the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in February 2016. In December 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the government and relators in the qui tam matter that included total monetary consideration of $63,700, as previously disclosed, of which $41,500 was an incremental cash payment and $22,200 was for amounts previously refunded, and all of which was previously accrued. The government’s investigation into certain of the Company's relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers is ongoing, and in July 2018 the OIG served the Company with a subpoena seeking additional documents and information relating to those relationships. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. 2017 U.S. Attorney Massachusetts Investigation: In January 2017, the Company was served with an administrative subpoena for records by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts, relating to an investigation into possible federal health care offenses. The subpoena covers the period from January 1, 2007 through the present, and seeks documents relevant to charitable patient assistance organizations, particularly the American Kidney Fund, including documents related to efforts to provide patients with information concerning the availability of charitable assistance. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. 2017 U.S. Attorney Colorado Investigation: In November 2017, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Colorado informed the Company of an investigation it was conducting into possible federal health care offenses involving DaVita Kidney Care, as well as several of the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, including DMG, DaVita Rx, DaVita Laboratory Services, Inc. (DaVita Labs), and RMS Lifeline Inc. (Lifeline). In August 2018, the Company received a CID from the U.S. Attorney's Office. The CID was issued pursuant to the FCA and covers the period from January 2005 through the present. In connection with the resolution of the 2015 U.S. OIG Medicare Advantage Civil Investigation referred to below, the Company resolved possible claims relating to DMG in this investigation. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. 2017 U.S. Attorney Florida Investigation: In November 2017, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida informed the Company of an investigation it was conducting into possible federal healthcare offenses involving the Company's wholly-owned subsidiary, Lifeline. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. 2018 U.S. Attorney Florida Investigation: In March 2018, DaVita Labs received two CIDs from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Middle District of Florida that were identical in nature but directed to the two different labs. According to the face of the CIDs, the U.S. Attorney’s Office is conducting an investigation as to whether the Company’s subsidiary submitted claims for blood, urine, and fecal testing, where there were insufficient test validation or stability studies to ensure accurate results, in violation of the FCA. In October 2018, DaVita Labs received a subpoena from the OIG in connection with this matter requesting certain patient records linked to clinical laboratory tests. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. * * * Although the Company cannot predict whether or when proceedings might be initiated or when these matters may be resolved (other than as may be described above), it is not unusual for inquiries such as these to continue for a considerable period of time through the various phases of document and witness requests and on-going discussions with regulators and to develop over the course of time. In addition to the inquiries and proceedings specifically identified above, the Company frequently is subject to other inquiries by state or federal government agencies and/or private civil qui tam complaints filed by relators. Negative findings or terms and conditions that the Company might agree to accept as part of a negotiated resolution of pending or future government inquiries or relator proceedings could result in, among other things, substantial financial penalties or awards against the Company, substantial payments made by the Company, harm to the Company’s reputation, required changes to the Company’s business practices, exclusion from future participation in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs and, if criminal proceedings were initiated against the Company, possible criminal penalties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company. Shareholder and Derivative Claims Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia Securities Class Action Civil Suit: On February 1, 2017, the Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia filed a putative federal securities class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and certain executives. The complaint covers the time period of August 2015 to October 2016 and alleges, generally, that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws concerning the Company’s financial results and revenue derived from patients who received charitable premium assistance from an industry-funded non-profit organization. The complaint further alleges that the process by which patients obtained commercial insurance and received charitable premium assistance was improper and "created a false impression of DaVita’s business and operational status and future growth prospects." In November 2017, the court appointed the lead plaintiff and an amended complaint was filed on January 12, 2018. On March 27, 2018, the Company and various individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Briefing on the motion is complete. The plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on June 6, 2018. The Company filed a reply in support of the motion on July 19, 2018. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly. In re DaVita Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation: On August 15, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware consolidated three previously disclosed shareholder derivative lawsuits: the Blackburn Shareholder action filed on February 10, 2017, the Gabilondo Shareholder action filed on May 30, 2017, and the City of Warren Police and Fire Retirement System Shareholder action filed on June 9, 2017. The complaint covers the time period from 2015 to present and alleges, generally, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, corporate waste, and misrepresentations and/or failures to disclose certain information in violation of the federal securities laws in connection with an alleged practice to direct patients with government-subsidized health insurance into private health insurance plans to maximize the Company’s profits. An amended complaint was filed in September 2017, and on December 18, 2017, the Company filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to stay proceedings in the alternative. The plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on March 9, 2018. On June 25, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware granted the Company’s motion to stay proceedings and stayed the case until January 7, 2019, the date of the next status conference. During the status conference on January 7, 2019 the court further extended the stay until February 8, 2019. The parties submitted a proposed scheduling order on that date. The Company asked the Court to rule on the fully-briefed motion to dismiss before opening discovery. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly. Other Proceedings In addition to the foregoing, from time to time the Company is subject to other lawsuits, demands, claims, governmental investigations and audits and legal proceedings that arise due to the nature of its business, including contractual disputes, such as with payors, suppliers and others, employee-related matters and professional and general liability claims. From time to time, the Company also initiates litigation or other legal proceedings as a plaintiff arising out of contracts or other matters. Resolved Matters 2011 Suit against the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: As previously disclosed, the Company had a pending lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the federal government which was originally filed in May 2011. The lawsuit related to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) underpayment of dialysis services the Company provided from 2005 through 2011 to veterans pursuant to VA regulations. In the first quarter of 2017, the Company received a payment of $538,000 related to the settlement with the VA. The Company's consolidated entities recognized a net gain of $527,000 on this settlement. The Company's nonconsolidated and managed entities recognized a gain of $9,000, of which the Company's equity investment share was $3,000. The net effect was a net increase of $530,000 to the Company's operating income. 2015 OIG Medicare Advantage Civil Investigation: In March 2015, JSA HealthCare Corporation (JSA), a subsidiary of DMG, received a subpoena from the OIG requesting documents and information for the period from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2013, for certain MA plans for which JSA provided services. It also requested information regarding JSA’s communications about patient diagnoses as they related to certain MA plans generally, and more specifically as related to two Florida physicians with whom JSA previously contracted. In addition to the subpoena described above, in June 2015, the Company received a civil subpoena from the OIG seeking production of a wide range of documents relating to the Company’s and its subsidiaries’ (including DMG and its subsidiary JSA) provision of services to MA plans and related patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment submissions and payments. The Company believes that the request was part of a broader industry investigation into MA patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment practices and potential overpayments by the government. The information requested included information related to patient diagnosis coding practices for a number of conditions, including potentially improper historical DMG coding for a particular condition. With respect to that condition, the guidance related to that coding issue was discontinued following the Company’s November 1, 2012, acquisition of HealthCare Partners (now known as the Company's DMG business), and the Company notified Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in April 2015 of the coding practice and potential overpayments. In that regard, the Company identified certain additional coding practices which may have been problematic, some of which were the subject of the previously disclosed and dismissed Swoben Private Civil Suit. The Company entered into a settlement agreement with the DOJ and OIG to resolve these matters on September 28, 2018. As previously disclosed, an escrow established in connection with the Company's acquisition of HealthCare Partners in 2012 held back a portion of the purchase price to the prior owners of HealthCare Partners as security for the indemnification rights of the Company. The settlement amount of $270,000 was paid with these escrowed funds. White, Kathleen, et al. v. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc., Civil Action No. 15-cv-2106, U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado: Three actions (Menchaca v. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc., Saldana v. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. and Hardin v. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc.) were consolidated in December 2016 into one action in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. In all three actions, the plaintiffs brought claims for wrongful death based on allegations related to Granuflo®, a product used as a component of the dialysis process. The Menchaca and Saldana actions arose out of the treatment of patients in California, while the Hardin action arose out of the treatment of a patient in Illinois. On June 27, 2018, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, collectively awarding $8,500 in compensatory damages and $375,000 in punitive damages. Judgment on this verdict was not entered. In November 2018, the parties settled all three of the consolidated actions collectively for $25,500, and all three cases were dismissed with prejudice. One of the Company’s insurance carriers paid $9,200 of the settlement. The Company believes it is probable that it will be able to recover the remainder of the settlement amount from other insurers, indemnitors, and the like; however, the Company can make no assurances that it will recover the full amount. * * * Other than as described above, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcomes of the various legal proceedings and regulatory matters to which the Company is or may be subject from time to time, including those described in this Note 17 to these consolidated financial statements, or the timing of their resolution or the ultimate losses or impact of developments in those matters, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s revenues, earnings and cash flows. Further, any legal proceedings or regulatory matters involving the Company, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming, and often require management’s attention and result in significant legal expense, and may result in the diversion of significant operational resources, or otherwise harm the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition, cash flows or reputation.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for loss and gain contingencies. Describes any existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible loss incurred by an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, and typically discloses the amount of loss recorded or a range of possible loss, or an assertion that no reasonable estimate can be made. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 30 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/subtopic&trid=2127197 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/subtopic&trid=2127163 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LossContingencyDisclosures
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration