Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) Risk Analysis

The U.S. healthcare industry is heavily regulated by federal, state and local governments. Comprehensive statutes and regulations govern, among other things, the manner in which our Managed PCs provide and bill for services and collect reimbursement from governmental programs, third-party payors and patients, our contractual relationships with our Managed PCs and the owners of the Managed PCs, our relationships with referral sources and specialist physicians, and our marketing and advertising activities. The healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our and our supported offices' ability to operate include, but are not limited to: - the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (the "AKS") which prohibits the knowing and willful offer, payment, solicitation or receipt of any bribe, kickback, rebate or other remuneration for referring an individual, in return for ordering, leasing, purchasing or recommending or arranging for or to induce the referral of an individual or the ordering, purchasing or leasing of items or services covered, in whole or in part, by any federal healthcare program, such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. The AKS includes regulatory safe harbors that protect certain arrangements. Failure to meet the requirements of a safe harbor, however, does not render an arrangement illegal. Rather, the government may evaluate such arrangements on a case-by-case basis, taking into account all facts and circumstances, including the parties' intent and the arrangement's potential for abuse, and may be subject to greater scrutiny by enforcement agencies;- the federal physician self-referral law (the "Stark Law"), that, subject to limited exceptions, prohibits physicians from referring Medicare or Medicaid patients to an entity for the provision of certain designated health services if the physician or a member of such physician's immediate family has a direct or indirect financial relationship (including an ownership interest or a compensation arrangement) with the entity, and prohibit the entity from billing Medicare or Medicaid for such designated health services. The term "designated health services" includes, among other things, physical therapy services and clinical laboratory services. Unlike the AKS, the Stark Law is violated if the financial arrangement does not meet an applicable exception, regardless of any intent by the parties to induce or reward referrals or the reasons for the financial relationship and the referral;- the federal False Claims Act (the "FCA"), that imposes civil and criminal liability on individuals or entities that knowingly submit false or fraudulent claims for payment to the government or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement in order to have a false claim paid. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the government or by a private person under a qui tam, or "whistleblower," suit. There are many potential bases for liability under the FCA. The government has used the FCA to prosecute Medicare and other government healthcare program fraud such as coding errors, billing for services not provided, and providing care that is not medically necessary or that is substandard in quality. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal AKS or Stark Law constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA;- the criminal healthcare fraud provisions of HIPAA and related rules that prohibit knowingly and willfully executing a scheme or artifice to defraud any healthcare benefit program or falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any material false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the AKS, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation;- similar state law anti-kickback, self-referral, and false claims laws, some of which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any payor, including patients, state workers' compensation programs, and commercial insurers and include "whistleblower" provisions;- federal and state laws as well as coverage and reimbursement requirements that prohibit providers from billing and receiving payments for therapy services and other healthcare services, unless the services are medically necessary, adequately and accurately documented, and billed using codes that accurately reflect the type and level of service rendered and otherwise meet complex billing requirements, including, among others, individual, group and concurrent therapy services;- the Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibits the offering or giving of remuneration, including free services or discounts, and waivers of beneficiary cost sharing, to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries that is likely to influence the beneficiary's selection of a particular provider or supplier;- state corporate practice prohibitions and fee-splitting laws;- federal, state and local laws and policies that require clinical facilities and providers to maintain licensure, certification, or accreditation; and - federal and state laws pertaining to non-physician practitioners, such as nurse practitioners physician assistants, and therapy assistants, including scope of practice limitations and requirements for supervision of such practitioners and reimbursement-related requirements. These laws and regulations, among other things, constrain our business and limit the types of financial arrangements we and our Managed PCs may have with providers, customers, patients, vendors, and third- party payors, including our arrangements with our Managed PCs and the owners of the Managed PCs, Medical Expert Panels, Concentra Advanced Specialists, and our advertising and marketing practices and arrangements, including transportation provided to patients. Due to the breadth of these laws, the narrowness of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, and the range of interpretations to which they are subject, it is possible that some of our current or future practices might be challenged under one or more of these laws. To enforce compliance, the Office of the Inspector General ("OIG") and the DOJ recently have increased its scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to several investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. These investigations often are focused on billing, coding and clinical documentation practices as well as financial arrangements with referral sources. We expect federal government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers' compliance with the FCA and other applicable fraud and abuse laws. Failure to comply with these laws and other laws can result in civil and criminal penalties such as fines, damages, overpayment, recoupment, imprisonment, loss of licensure, enrollment status and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, imposition of a corporate integrity agreement, consent decree or similar agreements that impose ongoing compliance obligations. In addition, non-compliance with these laws or changes to these laws might have the effect of imposing additional costs on us or our managed offices or rendering invalid or illegal, in whole or in part, certain aspects of our MSAs and other arrangements between us and our Managed PCs and the owners of the Managed PCs. The risk of being found in violation of these laws and regulations is increased by the fact that many of them have not been fully interpreted by the regulatory authorities or the courts, and their provisions are sometimes open to a variety of interpretations. Our failure to accurately anticipate the application of these laws and regulations to our business or any other failure to comply with regulatory requirements could create significant liability for us and negatively affect our business. Any action against us or our Managed PCs for violation of these laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses, divert our management's attention from the operation of our business and result in adverse publicity.

The healthcare industry is subject to extensive federal, state, and local laws and regulations including but not limited to (i) business, facility, and professional licensure, including surveys, certification, accreditation, and recertification requirements; (ii) conduct of operations, including financial relationships among healthcare providers, fraud and abuse, anti-kickback, physician self-referral and false claims prohibitions including the Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal physician self-referral law, Civil Monetary Penalty Statute, and the False Claims Act; (iii) payment for services; and (iv) safeguarding protected health information. Both federal and state regulatory agencies inspect, survey, and audit our facilities to review our compliance with these laws and regulations. While our facilities intend to comply with existing licensing, certification requirements, and accreditation standards, there can be no assurance that these regulatory authorities will determine that all applicable requirements are fully met at any given time. A determination by any of these regulatory authorities that a facility is not in compliance with these requirements could lead to the imposition of requirements that the facility takes corrective action, assessment of fines and penalties, or loss of licensure, certification, or accreditation. These consequences could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, there have been heightened coordinated civil and criminal enforcement efforts by both federal and state government agencies relating to the healthcare industry. The ongoing investigations relate to, among other things, various referral practices, billing practices, and physician ownership. In the future, different interpretations or enforcement of these laws and regulations could subject us to allegations of impropriety or illegality or could require us to make changes in our facilities, equipment, personnel, services, and capital expenditure programs. These changes may increase our cost of services and reduce our operating revenues. If we fail to comply with these extensive laws and government regulations, we could become ineligible to receive government program reimbursement, suffer civil or criminal penalties, or be required to make significant changes to our operations. In addition, we could be forced to expend considerable resources responding to or defending against any related investigation or other enforcement action.

In recent years, states including California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Indiana and Washington are becoming increasingly interested in the review of health care transactions for impacts on costs, access to care and quality. Transactions involving multi-state organizations with hundreds of health care providers across the country can now be subject to state reviews because one or more providers derive revenue from patients within the state. Certain state laws apply to transactions involving MSOs, and the review processes can involve lengthy review and approval periods, require enhanced disclosure obligations and impact analysis, public notices and hearings, and approval conditions and post-closing oversight, including ongoing reporting obligations. Overall, these state laws regulating costs, access to care and quality, in effect and those that may go into effect in the future, may delay or burden our transactions, including future add-on acquisitions, increase costs associated with expansion, require intrusive disclosures, and impose onerous, ongoing reporting obligations. If there are any delays in receiving regulatory approvals from the applicable government agencies, or the inability to receive such approvals, such delays or denials could negatively impact our business.

Many states prohibit, by statute, regulation, guidance from professional licensing boards or state attorneys general or under common law, the unlicensed practice of certain professionals, such as medicine and physical therapy. Corporate practice restrictions are generally designed to prohibit a non-professional entity or individual from owning a practice, employing providers or controlling or unduly influencing the professional practice and clinical decision making of the licensed professional. The laws relating to corporate practice vary from state to state and are subject to change and to evolving interpretations by courts, state licensing boards and state attorneys general, among others. Further, changes to the membership or staff of state agencies, licensing boards or attorney general offices could lead to increased enforcement of these laws and regulations. Many states also have laws that prohibit a non-professional entity or individual from sharing in or splitting profits or professional fees for patient care, often referred to as "fee-splitting." Some states also prohibit entities from engaging in certain financial arrangements, such as fee-splitting, with physicians or therapists. The laws relating to fee-splitting also vary from state to state and are not fully developed. Generally, these laws restrict business arrangements that involve a physician or therapist sharing professional fees with a non-professional source, but in some states, these laws have been interpreted to extend to management agreements between physicians or therapists and business entities under some circumstances. We believe that our current and planned activities do not constitute the unlawful practice of medicine or fee-splitting, or the unlawful corporate practice of medicine or therapy as contemplated by these state laws. However, the interpretations of such laws vary from state to state and are enforced by governmental, judicial, law enforcement or regulatory authorities with broad discretion. Additionally, it is possible that the laws and rules governing the practice of medicine and therapy and fee-splitting in one or more jurisdictions may change in a manner adverse to our business. Accordingly, we must monitor our compliance with laws in every jurisdiction in which we operate on an ongoing basis, and there can be no assurance that future interpretations of such laws will not require structural and organizational modification of our existing relationships with the affiliated professional medical groups. State regulatory authorities may review our agreements with affiliated professional medical groups and structure for legal and regulatory compliance. The specific restrictions that may be imposed on us if we are found to violate the laws governing corporate practice of or professional fee-splitting vary from state to state. If a court or regulatory body determines that we have violated these laws or if new laws are introduced that would render our arrangements illegal, we could be subject to civil or criminal penalties, and our contracts could be found legally invalid and unenforceable (in whole or in part), or we could be required to restructure our contractual arrangements with our affiliated physicians and other licensed providers and restructure our business model.

Our affiliated professional medical groups and some of our colleagues are involved in the delivery of healthcare and related services to the public. In providing these services, the physicians and other licensed providers in our affiliated professional medical groups, and consequently we, are exposed to the risk of professional liability claims. Many of these involve large claims and significant defense costs and if successful, could result in significant liabilities that may exceed our insurance coverage and the financial ability of our affiliated professional medical groups to indemnify us. We are also subject to lawsuits under federal and state whistleblower statutes designed to combat fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. These whistleblower lawsuits are not covered by insurance and can involve significant monetary damages and award bounties to private plaintiffs who successfully bring the suits. See "Item 3. Legal Proceedings." and Note 17-"Commitments and Contingencies," to our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K. We currently maintain professional malpractice liability insurance and general liability insurance coverages through a number of different programs that are dependent upon such factors as the state where we are operating and whether the operations are wholly owned or operated through a joint venture. To address claims arising out of the Company's operations, the Company maintains professional malpractice liability insurance and general liability insurance coverages through a number of different programs that are dependent upon such factors as the state where the Company is operating. The Company currently maintains insurance coverages under a combination of policies with a total annual per claim aggregate limit of $29.0 million for professional malpractice liability insurance and general liability insurance. The Company's insurance for the professional liability coverage is written on a "claims-made" basis, and its commercial general liability coverage is maintained on an "occurrence" basis. These coverages apply after a self-insured retention limit is exceeded. In addition, the Company purchases additional primary care limits in certain patient compensation fund states, including Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The Company also maintains additional types of liability insurance covering claims that, due to their nature or amount, are not covered by or not fully covered by the applicable professional malpractice and general liability insurance policies, including workers compensation, property and casualty, directors and officers, cyber liability, and employment practices liability insurance coverages. Our insurance policies generally are silent with respect to punitive damages so coverage is available to the extent insurable under the law of any applicable jurisdiction, and are subject to various deductibles and policy limits. The Company reviews its insurance program annually and may make adjustments to the amount of insurance coverage and self-insured retentions in future years. Significant legal actions, as well as the cost and possible lack of available insurance, could subject the Company to substantial uninsured liabilities.

Pursuant to the Separation Agreement and certain other agreements we have entered into with SMC in connection with the Separation, SMC agreed to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, third parties could also seek to hold us responsible for any of the liabilities that SMC has agreed to retain and we cannot assure you that the indemnity from SMC will be sufficient to protect us against the full amount of such liabilities, or that SMC will be able to fully satisfy its indemnification obligations. In addition, pursuant to the Separation Agreement, SMC's self-funded insurance policies are not available to us, and SMC's third-party insurance policies may not be available to us, for liabilities associated with occurrences of indemnified liabilities prior to the Separation, and in any event SMC's insurers may deny coverage to us for liabilities associated with certain occurrences of indemnified liabilities prior to the Separation. Moreover, even if we ultimately succeed in recovering from SMC or its insurance providers any amounts for which we are held liable, we may be temporarily required to bear these losses. The occurrence of any of these events could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A distribution that would otherwise qualify as a tax-free transaction, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, under Section 355 of the Code can be rendered taxable to the parent corporation and its stockholders as a result of certain post-distribution acquisitions of shares or assets of the distributed corporation. To preserve the tax-free treatment of certain steps of the Separation and the Distribution for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we are restricted under the Tax Matters Agreement from taking certain actions that would prevent certain steps of the Separation and the Distribution from being tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Under the Tax Matters Agreement, for the two-year period following the Distribution, we are subject to specific restrictions on our ability to enter into certain acquisition, merger, liquidation, sale and stock redemption transactions with respect to our stock. These restrictions may limit our ability to pursue certain strategic transactions or other transactions that we may believe to be in the best interests of our stockholders or that might increase the value of our business. These restrictions do not limit the acquisition of other businesses by us for cash consideration. In addition, under the Tax Matters Agreement, we are generally required to indemnify Select against certain tax liabilities that may result from the acquisition of our stock or assets, even if we do not participate in or otherwise facilitate the acquisition. Furthermore, we are subject to specific restrictions on discontinuing the active conduct of our trade or business, the issuance or sale of stock or other securities (including securities convertible into our stock but excluding certain compensatory arrangements) and sales of assets outside the ordinary course of business. These restrictions may reduce our strategic and operating flexibility. See "Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions?-?Agreements Entered into in Connection with the Separation?-?Tax Matters Agreement."

Select received a private letter ruling from the IRS substantially to the effect that, among other things, certain steps of the Separation together with the Distribution will qualify as a transaction that is tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes under Section 355 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The Distribution was conditioned on, among other things, the continuing effectiveness and validity of Select's private letter ruling from the IRS and the receipt of favorable opinions of Select's U.S. tax advisors. The private letter ruling relied on and the tax opinions will rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations and undertakings from us and Select regarding the past and future conduct of the companies' respective businesses and other matters. If any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are incorrect or not otherwise satisfied, Select and its stockholders may not be able to rely on the ruling or the opinions of tax advisors and could be subject to significant tax liabilities. Notwithstanding the private letter ruling and opinions of tax advisors, the IRS could determine on audit that certain steps of the Separation or the Distribution are taxable if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations or undertakings are not correct or have been violated or if it disagrees with the conclusions in the opinions that are not covered by the private letter ruling, or for other reasons, including as a result of certain significant changes in our stock ownership or the stock ownership of Select following the Distribution. If certain steps of the Separation or the Distribution are determined to be taxable for U.S. federal income tax purposes, then Select or its stockholders could incur significant U.S. federal income tax liabilities and we could also incur significant liabilities under the Tax Matters Agreement. Under the Tax Matters Agreement, we will generally be required to indemnify Select against taxes incurred by Select arising from any breach of representations made by us (including those provided in connection with the private letter ruling from the IRS and opinions from tax advisors) or from certain other acts or omissions, in each case that result in certain steps of the Separation or the Distribution failing to meet the requirements under Section 355 of the Code. See "Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions?-?Agreements Entered into in Connection with the Separation?-?Tax Matters Agreement."

Increasing scrutiny and rapidly evolving expectations, including by governmental and non-governmental organizations, consumer advocacy groups, third-party interest groups, investors, consumers, customers, employees and other stakeholders, regarding ESG practices and performance, particularly as they relate to the environment, sustainability, climate change, health and safety, supply chain management, diversity, labor conditions and human rights, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The standards for tracking and reporting on ESG matters are relatively new, have not been harmonized and continue to evolve. Legislators and regulators have imposed, and likely will continue to impose, ESG-related legislation, rules, and guidance, which may conflict with one another, create new disclosure obligations, result in additional compliance costs, or expose us to new or additional risks. In addition, customers and other stakeholders have encouraged or insisted on, and likely will continue to encourage or insist on in the future, the adoption of various ESG practices that may conflict with one another and may exceed the requirements of applicable laws or regulations. Furthermore, certain organizations that provide information to investors have developed ratings for evaluating companies on their approach to various ESG matters. Implementing any necessary enhancements to our global processes and controls to reflect the increased scrutiny and rapidly evolving expectations regarding ESG matters may be complex, time-consuming, and costly. We expect that stakeholders will compare our ESG goals and commitments against those of our competitors. Our competitors could have more robust ESG goals and commitments or be more successful at implementing their ESG goals and commitments than us, which could adversely affect our reputation. Our competitors could also decide not to establish ESG goals and commitments at a scope or scale that is comparable to our ESG goals and commitments, which could result in our competitors having lower supply chains or operating costs. Our reputation may be affected by our perceived ESG credentials and our ability to meet our ESG goals. Despite our efforts, any actual or perceived failure to achieve our ESG goals or the perception (whether or not valid) that we have failed to act responsibly with respect to ESG matters, comply with ESG laws or regulations or meet societal, investor and consumer ESG expectations could result in negative publicity and reputational damage, lead consumers or customers to purchase competing products or investors to choose not to invest in our company or cause dissatisfaction among our employees or other stakeholders, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our senior officers and other key employees, and our ability to retain and motivate these individuals. We currently have employment agreements and/or non-competition agreements in place with all executive officers and others on our management team. We do not maintain any key life insurance policies for any of our employees. The loss of the services of certain of these individuals could disrupt significant aspects of our business, could prevent us from successfully executing our business strategy, and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Initiatives undertaken by state workers' compensation commissions, insurance companies, and other payors to contain the costs of healthcare services, including occupational health services and urgent care services, may adversely affect our financial performance. The cost of medical care provided for workers' compensation services is often determined by a state fee schedule and state workers' compensation commissions seek to control healthcare costs by reducing prescribed rates of reimbursements through fee schedule modifications. We compete with other healthcare providers, such as hospitals, who contract with insurance companies and other third-party payors and may be able to negotiate more favorable rates or provide services at a lower cost. We believe that these cost containment measures may continue and, if so, would limit reimbursements for healthcare services that our affiliated clinicians provide. If state workers' compensation commissions or third-party payors reduce the amounts they pay for healthcare services, our revenue, profitability, and financial condition may be adversely affected.

We have experienced and may continue to experience decreased profitability due to increased labor costs. A number of factors contribute to increased labor costs, such as constrained staffing due to a shortage of healthcare workers, increased dependence on contract workers, the cost of recruiting and training new employees, the cost of retaining existing staff, and other government regulations, which include laws and regulations related to minimum wage standards and workers' health and safety. We are highly dependent upon the ability of our affiliated professional medical groups to recruit and retain qualified physicians and other licensed providers to provide services to our existing occupational health centers and onsite health clinics and to expand our business. We compete with many types of healthcare entities, including teaching, research, and government hospitals and institutions, and other practice groups for the services of qualified physicians, clinicians, physical therapists and other healthcare professionals. Our affiliated professional medical groups may not be able to continue to recruit new clinicians or renew contracts with existing clinicians on acceptable terms. Difficulties in attracting and retaining qualified healthcare personnel can limit our ability to staff our facilities. Our affiliated professional medical groups supplement their clinical personnel with a staffing agency, which can increase our costs and lower our margins. Additionally, the cost of attracting, training, and retaining qualified healthcare personnel has been and may continue to be higher than historical trends which may cause our profitability to decline. While we have historically experienced some level of ordinary course employee turnover, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting actions have exacerbated labor shortages and increased employee turnover. In some markets, the availability of clinicians and other medical support personnel has been a significant operating issue for healthcare providers, including at certain of our facilities. Increased employee turnover rates within our employee base can lead to decreased efficiency and increased costs, such as increased overtime to meet demand, increased compensation and bonuses to attract and retain employees, and incremental training costs. We may be required to continue to enhance wages and benefits to recruit and retain clinicians and other medical support personnel or to hire more expensive temporary or contract personnel. An overall or prolonged labor shortage, lack of skilled labor, increased employee turnover or continued increase in the cost of recruiting and retaining employees could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and cash flows. If our labor costs continue to increase, we may not be able to reduce other operating expenses in a manner sufficient to offset these increased labor costs. Our failure to recruit and retain qualified management, clinicians and other medical support personnel, or to control our labor costs, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, United States healthcare providers in recent years have seen an increase in the amount of union activity. Although our workforce is currently non-union, we cannot predict the degree to which we will be affected by future union activity and there may be legislative or executive actions that could result in increased union activity.

SMC is providing us with services related to certain historically shared corporate functions pursuant to the Transition Services Agreement during the transitional period following the Distribution. These services will cover a variety of corporate functions for terms of varying duration. We are relying on SMC to satisfy its obligations during the term of the Transition Services Agreement. Failure by SMC to perform these obligations, or any delay in or disruption to SMC's ability to perform these obligations, could increase our costs of procuring these services, result in system or service interruptions, divert our management's focus or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, potentially for an extended period of time. Furthermore, pursuant to the Transition Services Agreement, SMC has agreed to perform the services for us in a manner consistent with the past practice of our business. As a result, our operational flexibility to implement changes with respect to these services or the amounts we pay for them is limited, and we may not be able to implement changes in a manner desirable to us. In addition, since 2015, we have historically received informal support from SMC, which may not be addressed in the Transition Services Agreement. This level of this informal support will continue to diminish or be eliminated. The services that SMC is providing to us pursuant to the Transition Services Agreement are transitional in nature. We are in the process of creating our own, or engaging alternative third-party sources to provide, systems and services to replicate or replace many of the systems and services that SMC currently provides to us. However, we may not be able to successfully replicate or replace these services or obtain the services at the same or better quality, at the same or lower costs or otherwise on the same or more favorable terms and conditions from third parties. For example, implementing our own information technology framework will be a complex, time-consuming and costly process, and could make us more vulnerable to cyber-attacks, network disruptions or other information security or cyber-security incidents. Furthermore, to the extent we decide to engage one or more third parties to provide these services to us in the future, we could encounter additional risks associated with reliance on third parties. If we do not have our own systems and services, or comparable agreements with alternative third-party sources, in place when the Transition Services Agreement expires, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected, including in the manner described in the preceding paragraph.

The agreements we have entered into with Select and SMC in connection with the Separation, including the Separation Agreement, the Tax Matters Agreement, the Employee Matters Agreement and the Transition Services Agreement, were prepared in the context of our separation from SMC while we were still part of SMC. Accordingly, during the period in which these agreements were prepared, we did not have a separate or independent board of directors or a management team that was separate from or independent of Select. The terms of these agreements, including the fees charged for services provided under these agreements, were primarily determined by Select and SMC and, as a result, may not necessarily reflect terms that would have resulted from arm's-length negotiations between unaffiliated third parties or from arm's-length negotiations between Select, SMC and an unaffiliated third party in another form of transaction, such as a buyer in a sale of a business transaction.