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: 0-26824

RENNOVA HEALTH, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (561) 855-1626

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered under 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 [X] No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. [X] Yes [  ] 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). [X] Yes [  ] No

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) 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 to this Form 10-K. [  ]

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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one)

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 [X] No

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2017 was $4,961,093.

As of April 1, 2018, the registrant had 500,000,000 shares of Common Stock outstanding.

Documents Incorporated by Reference:

Part III (Items 10, 12, 13 and 14) of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the definitive Proxy Statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than 120 days after the end of the registrant’s fiscal year covered by this report or, alternatively, by amendment to this Form 10-K under cover of Form 10-K/A no later than the end of such 120-day period.

RENNOVA HEALTH, INC.
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RENNOVA HEALTH, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2017

PART I

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are “forward-looking statements” (within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) regarding the plans and objectives of management for future operations. Such statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements of the Registrant to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements included herein are based on current expectations that involve numerous risks and uncertainties. The Registrant’s plans and objectives are based, in part, on assumptions involving the continued expansion of business. Assumptions relating to the foregoing involve judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive and market conditions and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond the control of the Registrant. Although the Registrant believes its assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements are reasonable, any of the assumptions could prove to be inaccurate and, therefore, there can be no assurance the forward-looking statements included in this Report will prove to be accurate. Considering the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by the Registrant or any other person that the objectives and plans of the Registrant will be achieved.

The forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-K and referred to elsewhere are related to future events, our strategies or future financial performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “should,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “future,” “potential,” “estimate,” “encourage,” “opportunity,” “growth,” “leader,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “expand,” “focus,” “through,” “strategy,” “provide,” “offer,” “allow,” “commitment,” “implement,” “result,” “increase,” “establish,” “perform,” “make,” “continue,” “can,” “ongoing,” “include” or the negative of such terms or comparable terminology. All forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-K are based on information available to us as of the filing date of this report, and the Company assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements, except as required by law. Our actual results could differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements include those described in Item 1A, “Risk Factors.”

Rennova Health, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries, “Rennova”, “we” or the “Company”) is a provider of an expanding group of health care services for healthcare providers, patients and individuals. Beginning in 2018, the Company intends to focus on and operate two synergistic divisions: 1) Clinical diagnostics through its clinical laboratories; and 2) Hospital operations through its Big South Fork Medical Center, which opened on August 8, 2017, and a hospital in Jamestown Tennessee, including a doctor’s practice, the assets of which we expect to acquire in the second quarter of 2018, pursuant to the terms of a definitive asset purchase agreement that we entered into on January 31, 2018, as more fully discussed below. We believe that our approach will produce a more sustainable business model and the capture of multiple revenue streams from medical providers, patients and hospital services. Management determined that because Big South Fork Medical Center was reopened after being closed and contracts with payers had to be negotiated and implemented during the first months of operation, they would recognize a 20% collection rate for the period to December 31, 2017 until there was adequate collection history to analyze and confirm anticipated collections. Jamestown is a fully operating facility.

On July 12, 2017, the Company announced plans to spin off its Advanced Molecular Services Group (“AMSG”) and in the third quarter 2017 the Company’s Board of Directors voted unanimously to spin off the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Health Technology Solutions, Inc. (“HTS”), as independent publicly traded companies by way of tax-free distributions to the Company’s stockholders. Completion of these spinoffs is expected to occur in the third quarter of 2018. Our Board of Directors is currently considering if AMSG and HTS would be better as one combined spinoff instead of two. The spinoffs are subject to numerous conditions, including effectiveness of Registration Statements on Form 10 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and consents, including under various funding agreements previously entered into by the Company. A record date to determine those stockholders entitled to receive shares in the spinoffs should be approximately 30 to 60 days prior to the dates of the spinoffs. The strategic goal of the spinoffs is to create three (or two) public companies, each of which can focus on its own strengths and operational plans. In addition, after the spinoffs, each company will provide a distinct and targeted investment opportunity.

The Company has reflected the amounts relating to AMSG and HTS as disposal groups classified as held for sale and included in discontinued operations in the Company’s accompanying consolidated financial statements. Prior to being classified as held for sale, AMSG had been included in the Decision Support and Informatics division, except for the Company’s subsidiary, Alethea Laboratories, Inc., which had been included in the Clinical Laboratories division and HTS had been included in the Company’s Supportive Software Solutions division. The Company believes it will be able to recognize the expenditures to date, which is in excess of $20 million, as an investment after the spinoff(s) are complete.

We have received approximately $15.7 million in cash from the issuances of debentures and warrants during 2017 (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements), $4.3 million from related parties (see Notes 7 and 8 to the consolidated financial statements) and an additional $4.0 million of proceeds on October 30, 2017 from the issuance of our convertible preferred stock (see Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements). Subsequent to December 31, 2017, we received $2 million from the issuance of debentures and $0.8 million from the sale of stock we owned (see Note 20).

The protective covenants in the various agreements combined with the Company’s current inability to issue new shares and nonpayment of certain liabilities means that $12.4 million that might otherwise be treated as equity have been treated as derivative liabilities and had the relative effect applied to the Company’s financial statements including the profit and loss and balance sheet.

Our net loss from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $50.9 million, as compared to $22.6 million for the same period of a year ago. The change is primarily due to the decrease in operating expenses of $5.1 million and the increase in revenue of $1.3 million offset by $12.4 million additional expense related to the value of derivative liabilities referred to above, an increase of $15.2 million in interest expense, the decrease of $5.3 million in other income (expense), and additional income tax expense of $1.8 million.

History and Development of the Company

Medytox Solutions, Inc. (“Medytox”) was organized on July 20, 2005 under the laws of the State of Nevada. In the first half of 2011, Medytox’s management elected to reorganize as a holding company, and Medytox established and acquired a number of companies in the medical service and software sector between 2011 and 2014.

On November 2, 2015, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 15, 2015, by and among CollabRx, Inc. (“CollabRx”), CollabRx Merger Sub, Inc. (“Merger Sub”), a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx formed for the purpose of the merger, and Medytox, Merger Sub merged with and into Medytox, with Medytox as the surviving company and a direct, wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx (the “Merger”). Prior to closing, the Company amended its certificate of incorporation to effect a 1-for-10 reverse stock split and to change its name to Rennova Health, Inc. In connection with the Merger, (i) each share of common stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive 0.4096 shares of common stock of the Company, (ii) each share of Series B Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series B Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company, and (iii) each share of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company. This transaction was accounted for as a reverse merger in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) and, as such, the historical financial statements of Medytox became the historical financial statements of the Company.

Holders of Company equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Company common stock and all restricted stock units, options and warrants exercisable for shares of Company common stock) held 10% of the Company’s common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, and holders of Medytox equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Medytox common stock and all outstanding options exercisable for shares of Medytox common stock, but less certain options that were cancelled upon the closing pursuant to agreements between Medytox and such optionees) held 90% of the Company’s common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, in each case on a fully diluted basis, provided, however, outstanding shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, certain outstanding convertible promissory notes exercisable for Company common stock after the closing and certain option grants expected to be made following the closing of the Merger were excluded from such ownership percentages.

Common Stock Listing

On November 3, 2015, the common stock of Rennova Health, Inc. commenced trading on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “RNVA.” Prior to that date, our common stock was listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “CLRX.”

On April 18, 2017, the Company was notified by NASDAQ that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fell below the $2.5 million minimum requirement for continued listing under The Nasdaq Capital Market’s Listing Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Rule”). In accordance with the Rule, the Company submitted a plan to Nasdaq outlining how it intended to regain compliance. On August 17, 2017, Nasdaq notified the Company that its plan to correct the stockholders’ equity deficiency did not contain sufficient evidence to support a correction being achieved in the required time frame. The Company appealed this decision to a Hearing Panel which, on October 23, 2017, maintained this position and denied the Company a continued listing. Effective October 25, 2017, the Company’s common stock (RNVA) and warrants to purchase common stock (RNVAW) were no longer listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market but began trading on the OTCQB instead.

Reverse Stock Splits

On February 7, 2017, the Company’s Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation to effect a 1-for-30 reverse stock split of the Company’s shares of common stock effective on February 22, 2017 and on September 21, 2017, the Company’s Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation to effect a 1-for-15 reverse stock split effective October 5, 2017 (the “Reverse Stock Splits”). The stockholders of the Company had approved these amendments to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation on December 22, 2016 for the February 22, 2017 reverse stock split and on September 20, 2017 for the October 5, 2017 reverse stock split. In both cases, the Company’s stockholders had granted authorization to the Board of Directors to determine in its discretion the specific ratio, subject to limitations, and the timing of the reverse splits within certain specified effective dates.

As a result of the Reverse Stock Splits, every 30 shares of the Company’s then outstanding common stock was combined and automatically converted into one share of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, on February 22, 2017 and every 15 shares of the Company’s then outstanding common stock was combined and automatically converted into one share of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, on October 5, 2017. In addition, the conversions and exercise prices of all of the Company’s outstanding preferred stock, common stock purchase warrants, stock options, restricted stock, equity incentive plans and convertible notes payable were proportionately adjusted at the 1:30 reverse split ratio and again at the 1:15 reverse split ratio in accordance with the terms of such instruments. In addition, proportionate voting rights and other rights of common stockholders were not affected by the Reverse Stock Splits, other than as a result of the rounding up of fractional shares in the February reverse split and the payment of cash in lieu of fractional shares in the October reverse split, as no fractional shares were issued in connection with the Reverse Stock Splits.

The par value and other terms of the common stock were not affected by the Reverse Stock Splits. The authorized capital of the Company of 500,000,000 shares of common stock and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock were also unaffected by the Reverse Stock Splits. All share, per share and capital stock amounts as of and for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 have been restated to give effect to the Reverse Stock Splits.

Recent Developments

Asset Purchase Agreement to Acquire Acute Care Hospital

On January 31, 2018, the Company entered into an asset purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) to acquire certain assets related to an acute care hospital located in Jamestown, Tennessee. The hospital is known as Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown and its associated assets, including a separately located doctor’s practice, are being acquired from Community Health Systems, Inc. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018, subject to customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions. The purchase price is equal to the Net Working Capital (as defined in the Purchase Agreement), plus $1.00.

Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is a fully-operational 85-bed facility including a 24/7 emergency department, radiology department, surgical center, and a wound care and hyperbaric center. The purchase includes a 90,000-square foot hospital building on approximately eight acres. Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is located 38 miles from the Company’s existing hospital, the Big South Fork Medical Center, which is located in Oneida Tennessee.

Proposals Submitted to Stockholders

On March 14, 2018, the Company gave notice of a special meeting of the stockholders of the Company to be held on May 2, 2018, at 11:00 a.m., local time, to, among other things:

1. Approve an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, to effect a reverse stock split of all of the outstanding shares of its common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at a specific ratio within a range from 1-for-50 to 1-for-300, and to grant authorization to its Board of Directors to determine, in its discretion, the specific ratio and timing of the reverse stock split any time before March 1, 2019, subject to the Board of Directors’ discretion to abandon such amendment;

2. Approve an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, to increase the number of authorized shares of our common stock from 500,000,000 to 3,000,000,000 shares; and

3. Approve the Company’s new 2018 Incentive Award Plan.

The Board of Directors fixed the close of business on March 12, 2018 as the record date for the determination of stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Special Meeting.

The Company’s new 2018 Incentive Award Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights, performance shares, performance stock units, dividend equivalents, stock payments, deferred stock, restricted stock units, other stock-based awards, and performance-based awards. An aggregate of 100,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock is proposed to be available for grant pursuant to the plan. No determination has been made as to the types or amounts of awards that will be granted to specific individuals pursuant to the plan and no awards will be granted under the plan until there are shares of authorized common stock available.

Accounts Receivable Financing

As previously announced, on March 31, 2016 the Company entered into an agreement to sell certain of its accounts receivable. The agreement was originally scheduled to mature on March 31, 2017, which date was extended to March 31, 2018 by an amendment on March 24, 2017. On April 2, 2018, the Company, the purchaser and Christopher Diamantis, a Director of the Company, as guarantor, entered into a second amendment to extend further the Company’s obligation to May 30, 2018. In connection with this further extension, the purchaser received a fee of $100,000. To the extent the Company satisfies its obligations to the purchaser prior to May 30, 2018, the $100,000 fee will be reduced pro rata and the reduced portion shall be refunded to the Company.

Share Issuances

On March 6, 2018, the Board of Directors, based on the recommendation of the Compensation Committee, approved grants to employees and directors of an aggregate of 71,333,331 shares of common stock, including the following to the directors of the Company:

The shares were issued in reliance on the exemption from registration contained in Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), as a transaction by an issuer not involving a public offering.

On February 9, 2018, holders of the Company’s Senior Secured Original Issue Discount Convertible Debentures due September 19, 2019 exercised their right for the first time under exchange agreements (the “Exchange Agreements”) entered into with the Company by electing to exchange an aggregate of $1,384,556 principal amount of such Debentures and the Company issued an aggregate 1,731 shares of its Series I-2 Convertible Preferred Stock. 

Such shares of Preferred Stock were issued in reliance on the exemption from registration contained in Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act.

NanoVibronix

On February 14, 2018, the Company entered into a Common Stock Purchase Agreement with two investors pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell an aggregate of 200,000 shares of common stock of NanoVibronix, Inc. owned by the Company at a purchase price of $4.00 per share. The Company had acquired the shares as a result of an investment originally made in 2011.

March 2018 Offering

On March 5, 2018, the Company closed an offering of $2,480,000 aggregate principal amount of Senior Secured Original Issue Discount Convertible Debentures due September 19, 2019. The Company received proceeds of $2,000,000 in the offering. The terms of these Debentures are the same as those issued under the previously-announced Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of August 31, 2017. These Debentures may also be exchanged for shares of the Company’s Series I-2 Convertible Preferred Stock under the terms of the Exchange Agreements.

The Debentures were issued in reliance on the exemption from registration contained in Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act and by Rule 506 of Registration D promulgated thereunder as a transaction by an issuer not involving a public offering.

Our Services

We are a healthcare enterprise that delivers products and services to healthcare providers, their patients and individuals. We operate in two synergistic divisions: 1) Clinical diagnostics services through our clinical laboratories; and 2) Hospital operations through our Big South Fork Medical Center and a hospital in Jamestown, Tennessee, the assets of which we expect to acquire in the second quarter of 2018. We aspire to create a more sustainable relationship with our customers by offering needed and interoperable solutions to capture multiple revenue streams from medical providers.

Clinical Diagnostics

Our principal line of business over the past few years has been clinical laboratory blood and urine testing services, with a particular emphasis on the provision of urine drug toxicology testing to physicians, clinics and rehabilitation facilities in the United States. As we expand our customer base to include pain management and other healthcare providers, testing services to rehabilitation facilities represented approximately 51% of the Company’s revenues for the year ended December 31, 2017 and approximately 100% of the Company’s revenues for the year ended December 31, 2016. We believe that we are responding to the challenges faced by today’s healthcare providers to adopt paper free and interoperable systems, and to market demand for solutions by strategically expanding our offering of diagnostics services to include a full suite of clinical laboratory services. The drug and alcohol rehabilitation and pain management sectors provide an existing and sizable target market, where the need for our services already exists and opportunity is being created by a continued secular growth and need for compliance. This sector has been fraught with difficulties over the past two years as payers reduce reimbursement and cover for diagnostics in this sector. The lack of consistency between payer’s policies and their requirement for proof of medical necessity has created uncertainty for ordering physicians and testing laboratories and their ability to receive payment. We have reduced the number of laboratories we operate in first quarter 2018 to one facility in West Palm Beach, Florida.

The Company owns and operates the following products and services to support its business objectives and to enable it to offer these services to its customers:

Medytox Diagnostics, Inc. (“MDI”)

Through our CLIA certified laboratories, Rennova offers toxicology, clinical pharmacogenetics and esoteric testing. Rennova seeks to provide these testing services with superior logistics and specimen integrity, competitive turn-around times and excellent customer service.

Clinical Laboratory Operations

The Company, through its wholly-owned MDI subsidiary, owns and operates the following clinical laboratory:

During the year 2016 and year ended December 31, 2017, the Company experienced a substantial decline in the volume of samples processed at its laboratories and continued difficulty in receiving reimbursement for certain diagnostics. As result, in an effort to reduce costs, the Company is currently operating all of its Clinical Laboratory Operations business segment out of its EPIC Reference Labs, Inc. (“EPIC”) laboratory, and cost reduction efforts are continuing in response to the operating losses incurred. MDI formed EPIC as a wholly-owned subsidiary on January 29, 2013 to provide reference, confirmation and clinical testing services. The Company acquired necessary equipment and licenses in order to allow EPIC to test urine for drugs and medication monitoring. Operations at EPIC began in January 2014 using approximately 2,500 square feet and the premises has since been expanded to occupy approximately 12,500 square feet.

The Company’s Medytox Medical Marketing & Sales, Inc. subsidiary was formed on March 9, 2013 as a wholly-owned subsidiary to provide marketing, sales, and customer service exclusively for our clinical laboratories.

Hospital Operations

The Company believes that the acquisition or development of rural hospitals will create a stable revenue base as a needed service and believes that it can expand the sales of its products and services to surrounding medical providers and doctors’ groups.

On January 13, 2017, we acquired the Hospital Assets in Oneida Tennessee, which include a 52,000-square foot hospital building and 6,300 square foot professional building on approximately 4.3 acres. Scott County Community Hospital, since renamed Big South Fork Medical Center, is classified as a Critical Access Hospital (rural) with 25 beds, a 24/7 emergency department, operating rooms and a laboratory that provides a range of diagnostic services. The hospital began operations on August 8, 2017, following the receipt of the required licenses and regulatory approvals and generated revenues of approximately $1.8 million during the period from August 8, 2017 to December 31, 2017.

The hospital had unaudited annual revenues of approximately $12 million, and a normalized EBITDA of approximately $1.3 million for Fiscal 2015, the last full year of the hospital’s operation. These revenues were attributable to the typical services of a rural acute care hospital, including emergency room visits, outpatient procedures, diagnostic ancillary tests, physical therapy and inpatient hospital stays. Based on the hospital’s historical information, we believe the hospital offers an established patient and stable revenue base as it serves the general healthcare needs of its community and supports local physicians. Management determined that because Big South Fork Medical Center was reopened after being closed and contracts with payers had to be negotiated and implemented during the first months of operation, they would recognize a 20% collection rate for the period to December 31, 2017 until there was adequate collection history to analyze and confirm anticipated collections.

On January 31, 2018, we entered into an asset purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) to acquire certain assets related to an acute care hospital and separate doctor’s practice located in Jamestown, Tennessee. The hospital is known as Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018, subject to customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions. Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is a fully-operational 85-bed facility including a 24/7 emergency department, radiology department, surgical center, and a wound care and hyperbaric center. The purchase includes a 90,000-square foot hospital building on approximately eight acres. Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is located 38 miles from the Company’s existing hospital, the Big South Fork Medical Center, which is located in Oneida Tennessee.

Marketing Strategy

Rennova provides a suite of products and services to the medical services sector. We endeavor to be a single source for multiple business solutions that serve the medical services industry. The Company intends to expand, through its acquisition and subsequent integration of businesses, into a robust business model providing an extensive range of services to medical providers that demonstrate improved patient care and outcomes.

Competition

The Company competes in a fragmented diagnostics industry split between independently-owned and physician-owned laboratories. There are three predominant players in the industry that operate as full-service clinical laboratories (processing blood, urine and other tissue). In addition, the competition ranges from smaller privately-owned laboratories (3-6 employees) to large publicly-traded laboratories with significant market capitalizations. The healthcare industry is highly competitive among hospitals and other healthcare providers for patients, affiliations with physicians and acquisitions. The most significant competition our hospital, and any other hospitals we may acquire, face comes from hospitals that provide more complex services, other healthcare providers, including outpatient surgery, orthopedic, oncology and diagnostic centers that also compete for patients. Our hospitals, our competitors, and other healthcare industry participants are increasingly implementing physician alignment strategies, such as acquiring physician practice groups, employing physicians and participating in ACOs or other clinical integration models, which may impact our competitive position. In addition, increasing consolidation within the payor industry, vertical integration efforts involving payors and healthcare providers, and cost-reduction strategies by large employer groups and their affiliates may impact our ability to contract with payors on favorable terms and otherwise affect our competitive position.

Governmental Regulation

General

The healthcare industry is subject to significant governmental laws and regulations at the federal, state and local levels. As described below, these laws and regulations concern licensure and operation of clinical laboratories and hospitals, claim submission and payment for services, health care fraud and abuse, security, privacy and confidentiality of health information, quality and environmental and occupational safety.

Regulation of Clinical Laboratories

The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (“CLIA”) are regulations that include federal standards applicable to all U.S. facilities or sites that test human specimens for health assessment or to diagnose, prevent, or treat disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”), in partnership with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) and the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), supports the CLIA program and clinical laboratory quality. CLIA requires that all clinical laboratories meet quality assurance, quality control and personnel standards. Laboratories also must undergo proficiency testing and are subject to inspections.

Standards for testing under CLIA are based on the complexity of the tests performed by the laboratory, with tests classified as “high complexity,” “moderate complexity,” or “waived.” Laboratories performing high complexity testing are required to meet more stringent requirements than moderate complexity laboratories. Laboratories performing only waived tests, which are tests determined by the FDA to have a low potential for error and requiring little oversight, may apply for a certificate of waiver exempting them from most of the requirements of CLIA. All Company laboratory facilities hold CLIA certificates to perform high complexity testing. The sanctions for failure to comply with CLIA requirements include suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, cancellation or suspension of the laboratory’s approval to receive Medicare and/or Medicaid reimbursement, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. The loss or suspension of a CLIA certification, imposition of a fine or other penalties, or future changes in the CLIA law or regulations (or interpretation of the law or regulations) could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

In addition to compliance with the federal regulations, the Company is also subject to state and local laboratory regulation. CLIA provides that a state may adopt laboratory regulations different from or more stringent than those contained in Federal law and a number of states have implemented their own laboratory requirements. State laws may require that laboratory personnel meet certain qualifications, specify certain quality controls, or require maintenance of certain records. There are a number of states that have even more stringent requirements with which lab personnel must comply to obtain state licensure or a certificate of qualification.

The Company believes that it is in compliance with all applicable laboratory requirements. The Company’s laboratories have continuing programs to ensure that their operations meet all such regulatory requirements, but no assurances can be given that the Company’s laboratories will pass all future licensure or certification inspections. We embrace compliance as an integral part of our culture and we consistently promote that culture of ethics and integrity.

The FDA has regulatory responsibility over instruments, test kits, reagents and other devices used by clinical laboratories. The FDA has issued draft guidance regarding FDA regulation of laboratory-developed tests (“LDTs”), but if or how the draft guidance will be implemented is uncertain. On November 18, 2016, the FDA announced it would not release final guidance at this time and instead would continue to work with stakeholders, the new administration and Congress to determine the right approach, and on January 3, 2017, the FDA released a discussion paper outlining a possible risk-based approach for FDA and CMS oversight of LTDs. Later in 2017, the FDA indicated that Congress should enact legislation to address improved oversight of diagnostics, including LTDs, rather than the FDA addressing the issue through administrative proposals. There are many other regulatory and legislative proposals that would increase general FDA oversight of clinical laboratories and LDTs. The outcome and ultimate impact of such proposals on the business is difficult to predict at this time. Our point of collection testing devices are regulated by the FDA. The FDA has authority to take various administrative and legal actions for non-compliance, such as fines, product suspension, warning letters, injunctions and other civil and criminal sanctions. We make every good faith effort to exercise proactive monitoring and review of pending legislation and regulatory action.

Payment for Services

In each of 2017 and 2016, the Company’s laboratories derived 16% and 12%, respectively, of their net sales directly from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In addition, the Company’s other business depends significantly on continued participation in these programs and in other government healthcare programs. In recent years, both governmental and private sector payers have made efforts to contain or reduce health care costs, including reducing reimbursement for services.

Reimbursement under the Medicare program for clinical diagnostic laboratory services is subject to a clinical laboratory fee schedule that sets the maximum amount payable in each Medicare carrier’s jurisdiction. This clinical laboratory fee schedule is updated annually. Laboratories bill the program directly for covered tests performed on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries. State Medicaid programs are prohibited from paying more than the Medicare fee schedule limit for clinical laboratory services furnished to Medicaid recipients.

For hospitals, the federal government similarly generally reviews payment rates under its various programs annually, and changes in reimbursement rates under such programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, generally occur based on the fiscal year of the federal government.

Medicare, Medicaid and other government program payment reductions will not currently have a direct adverse effect on the Company’s net earnings and cash flows, due to insignificant revenue earned, however, it is not currently possible to project what impact will be had in future years.

In addition to reimbursement rates, the Company is also impacted by changes in coverage policies. Congressional action in 1997 required the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to adopt uniform coverage, administration and payment policies for many of the most commonly performed lab tests using a negotiated rulemaking process. The negotiated rulemaking committee established uniform policies limiting Medicare coverage for certain tests to patients with specified medical conditions or diagnoses, replacing local Medicare coverage policies which varied around the country. The final rules generally became effective in 2002, and the use of uniform policies improves the Company’s ability to obtain necessary billing information in some cases, but Medicare, Medicaid and private payer diagnosis code requirements and payment policies continue to negatively impact the Company’s ability to be paid for some of the tests it performs. Further, some payers require additional information to process claims or have implemented prior authorization policies, which delay or prohibit payment. Due to the range of payers and policies, the extent of this impact continues to be difficult to quantify.

Future changes in federal, state and local laws and regulations (or in the interpretation of current regulations) affecting government payment could have a material adverse effect on the Company. In March 2010, comprehensive healthcare legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), was enacted. Numerous proposals continue to be discussed in Congress and the administration to repeal, amend or replace the ACA. Based on currently available information, the Company is unable to predict what type of changes in legislation or regulations, if any, will occur.

Standard Electronic Transactions, Security and Confidentiality of Health Information and Other Personal Information

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) was designed to address issues related to the security and confidentiality of health insurance information. In an effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care system by facilitating the electronic exchange of information in certain financial and administrative transactions, HIPAA regulations were promulgated. These regulations apply to health plans, health care providers that conduct standard transactions electronically and health care clearinghouses (“covered entities”). Six such regulations include: (i) the Transactions and Code Sets Rule; (ii) the Privacy Rule; (iii) the Security Rule; (iv) the Standard Unique Employer Identifier Rule, which requires the use of a unique employer identifier in connection with certain electronic transactions; (v) the National Provider Identifier Rule, which requires the use of a unique health care provider identifier in connection with certain electronic transactions; and (vi) the Health Plan Identifier Rule, which requires the use of a unique health plan identifier in connection with certain electronic transactions.

The Privacy Rule regulates the use and disclosure of protected health information (“PHI”) by covered entities. It also sets forth certain rights that an individual has with respect to his or her PHI maintained by a covered entity, such as the right to access or amend certain records containing PHI or to request restrictions on the use or disclosure of PHI. The Privacy Rule requires covered entities to contractually bind third parties, known as business associates, in the event that they perform an activity or service for or on behalf of the covered entity that involves the creation, receipt, maintenance or transmission of PHI. The Security Rule establishes requirements for safeguarding patient information that is electronically transmitted or electronically stored. The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the requirements of the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules.

The Federal Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH”), which was enacted in February 2009, with regulations effective on September 23, 2013, strengthens and expands the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules and their restrictions on use and disclosure of PHI. HITECH includes, but is not limited to, prohibitions on exchanging PHI for remuneration, and additional restrictions on the use of PHI for marketing. HITECH also fundamentally changes a business associate’s obligations by imposing a number of Privacy Rule requirements and a majority of Security Rule provisions directly on business associates that were previously only directly applicable to covered entities. Moreover, HITECH requires covered entities to provide notice to individuals, HHS, and, as applicable, the media when PHI is breached, as that term is defined by HITECH. Business associates are similarly required to notify covered entities of a breach. The Company believes its policies and procedures are fully compliant with the HITECH requirements.

On February 6, 2014, the CMS and HHS published final regulations that amended the HIPAA Privacy Rule to provide individuals (or their personal representatives) with the right to receive copies of their test reports from laboratories subject to HIPAA, or to request that copies of their test reports be transmitted to designated third parties. Previously, laboratories that were CLIA-certified or CLIA-exempt were not subject to the provision in the Privacy Rule that provides individuals with the right of access to PHI. The HIPAA Privacy Rule amendment resulted in the preemption of a number of state laws that prohibit a laboratory from releasing a test report directly to the individual. The Company revised its policies and procedures to comply with these new access requirements and has updated its privacy notice to reflect individuals’ new access rights under this final rule.

The standard unique employer identifier regulations require that employers have standard national numbers that identify them on standard transactions. The Employer Identification Number, also known as a Federal Tax Identification Number, issued by the Internal Revenue Service, was selected as the identifier for employers and was adopted effective July 30, 2002. The Company believes it is in compliance with these requirements.

The administrative simplification provisions of HIPAA mandate the adoption of standard unique identifiers for health care providers. The intent of these provisions is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the electronic transmission of health information. The National Provider Identification Rule requires that all HIPAA-covered health care providers, whether they are individuals or organizations, must obtain a National Provider Identifier (“NPI”) to identify themselves in standard HIPAA transactions. NPI replaces the unique provider identification number - as well as other provider numbers previously assigned by payers and other entities - for the purpose of identifying providers in standard electronic transactions. The Company believes that it is in compliance with the HIPAA National Provider Identification Rule in all material respects.

The Health Plan Identifier (HPID) is a unique identifier designed to furnish a standard way to identify health plans in electronic transactions. CMS published the final rule adopting the HPID for health plans required by HIPAA on September 12, 2012. Effective October 31, 2014, CMS announced a delay, until further notice, in the enforcement of regulations pertaining to health plan enumeration and use of the HPID in HIPAA transactions adopted in the HPID final rule. The delay remains in effect. The Company will continue to monitor future developments related to the HPID and respond accordingly.

Violations of the HIPAA provisions could result in civil and/or criminal penalties, including significant fines and up to 10 years in prison. HITECH also significantly strengthened HIPAA enforcement. It increased the civil penalty amounts that may be imposed, required HHS to conduct periodic audits to confirm compliance and also authorized state attorneys general to bring civil actions seeking either injunctions or damages in response to violations of the HIPAA privacy and security regulations that affect the privacy of state residents.

The total cost associated with the requirements of HIPAA and HITECH is not expected to be material to the Company’s operations or cash flows. However, future regulations and interpretations of HIPAA and HITECH could impose significant costs on the Company.

In addition to the HIPAA regulations described above, there are a number of other Federal and state laws regarding the confidentiality and security of medical information, some of which apply to our business. These laws vary widely, but they most commonly regulate or restrict the collection, use and disclosure of medical and financial information and other personal information. In some cases, state laws are more restrictive than and therefore not preempted by HIPAA. Penalties for violation of these laws may include sanctions against our licensure, as well as civil and/or criminal penalties. Additionally, numerous other countries have or are developing similar laws governing the collection, use, disclosure and transmission of personal and/or patient information.

The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the current Transactions and Code Sets Rule. The Company implemented Version 5010 of the HIPAA Transaction Standards and believes it has fully adopted the ICD-10-CM code set. The compliance date for ICD-10-CM was October 1, 2015. The costs associated with ICD-10-CM Code Set were substantial, and failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to apply the new code set could have an adverse impact on reimbursement, day’s sales outstanding and cash collections. As a result of inconsistent application of transaction standards by payers or the Company’s inability to obtain certain billing information not usually provided to the Company by physicians, the Company could face increased costs and complexity, a temporary disruption in receipts and ongoing reductions in reimbursements and net revenues.

On January 2, 2018, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) announced the finalization of proposed changes to the Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records regulation, 42 CFR Part 2. This regulation protects the confidentiality of patient records relating to the identity, diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment that are maintained in connection with the performance of any federally assisted program or activity relating to substance use disorder education, prevention, training, treatment, rehabilitation, or research. Under the regulation, patient identifying information may only be released with the individual’s written consent, subject to certain limited exceptions. The latest changes to this regulation seek to align its requirements more closely with HIPAA, while maintaining more stringent confidentiality of substance use disorder information. The Company will adopt such changes to its policies and procedures as may be necessary for compliance.

The Company believes it is in compliance in all material respects with the Operating Rules for electronic funds transfers and remittance advice transactions, for which the compliance date was January 1, 2014.

Fraud and Abuse Laws and Regulations

Existing federal laws governing federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, as well as similar state laws, impose a variety of broadly described fraud and abuse prohibitions on health care providers. These laws are interpreted liberally and enforced aggressively by multiple government agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice, HHS’ Office of Inspector General (“OIG”), and various state agencies. Historically, the clinical laboratory industry has been the focus of major governmental enforcement initiatives. The federal government’s enforcement efforts regarding health care providers have been increasing over the past decade, in part as a result of the enactment of HIPAA, which included several provisions related to fraud and abuse enforcement, including the establishment of a program to coordinate and fund federal, state and local law enforcement efforts. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 also included new requirements directed at Medicaid fraud, including increased spending on enforcement and financial incentives for states to adopt false claims act provisions similar to the federal False Claims Act. Amendments to the False Claims Act, as well as other enhancements to the federal fraud and abuse laws enacted as part of the ACA, have further increased fraud and abuse enforcement efforts and compliance issues. For example, the ACA established an obligation to report and refund overpayments from Medicare or Medicaid within 60 days of identification (whether or not paid through any fault of the recipient); failure to comply with this new requirement can give rise to additional liability under the False Claims Act and Civil Monetary Penalties statute. On February 11, 2016, CMS issued the final rule clarifying certain aspects of the overpayment requirement for purposes of Medicare, effective on March 14, 2016.

The federal health care programs’ anti-kickback law (the “Anti-Kickback Law”) prohibits knowingly providing anything of value in return for, or to induce the referral of, Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care program business. Violations can result in imprisonment, fines, penalties, and/or exclusion from participation in federal health care programs. The OIG has published “safe harbor” regulations which specify certain arrangements that are protected from prosecution under the Anti-Kickback Law if all conditions of the relevant safe harbor are met. Failure to fit within a safe harbor does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Anti-Kickback Law; rather, the arrangement would be subject to scrutiny by regulators and prosecutors and would be evaluated on a case by case basis. Many states have their own Medicaid anti-kickback laws and several states also have anti-kickback laws that apply to all payers (i.e., not just government health care programs).

From time to time, the OIG issues alerts and other guidance on certain practices in the health care industry that implicate the Anti-Kickback Law or other federal fraud and abuse laws. Examples of such guidance documents particularly relevant to the Company and its operations follow.

In October 1994, the OIG issued a Special Fraud Alert on arrangements for the provision of clinical laboratory services. The Fraud Alert set forth a number of practices allegedly engaged in by some clinical laboratories and health care providers that raise issues under the federal fraud and abuse laws, including the Anti-Kickback Law. These practices include: (i) providing employees to furnish valuable services for physicians (other than collecting patient specimens for testing) that are typically the responsibility of the physicians’ staff; (ii) offering certain laboratory services at prices below fair market value in return for referrals of other tests which are billed to Medicare at higher rates; (iii) providing free testing to physicians’ managed care patients in situations where the referring physicians benefit from such reduced laboratory utilization; (iv) providing free pick-up and disposal of bio-hazardous waste for physicians for items unrelated to a laboratory’s testing services; (v) providing general-use facsimile machines or computers to physicians that are not exclusively used in connection with the laboratory services; and (vi) providing free testing for health care providers, their families and their employees (i.e., so-called “professional courtesy” testing). The OIG emphasized in the Special Fraud Alert that when one purpose of such arrangements is to induce referrals of program-reimbursed laboratory testing, both the clinical laboratory and the health care provider (e.g., physician) may be liable under the Anti-Kickback Law, and may be subject to criminal prosecution and exclusion from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. More recently, in June 2014, the OIG issued another Special Fraud Alert addressing compensation paid by laboratories to referring physicians for blood specimen processing and for submitting patient data to registries. This Special Fraud Alert reiterates the OIG’s longstanding concerns about payments from laboratories to physicians in excess of the fair market value of the physician’s services and payments that reflect the volume or value of referrals of federal healthcare program business.

Another issue the OIG has expressed concern about involves the provision of discounts on laboratory services billed to customers in return for the referral of federal health care program business. In a 1999 Advisory Opinion, the OIG concluded that a proposed arrangement whereby a laboratory would offer physicians significant discounts on non-federal health care program laboratory tests might violate the Anti-Kickback Law. The OIG reasoned that the laboratory could be viewed as providing such discounts to the physician in exchange for referrals by the physician of business to be billed by the laboratory to Medicare at non-discounted rates. The OIG indicated that the arrangement would not qualify for protection under the discount safe harbor to the Anti-Kickback Law because Medicare and Medicaid would not get the benefit of the discount. Similarly, in a 1999 correspondence, the OIG stated that if any direct or indirect link exists between a discount that a laboratory offers to a skilled nursing facility (“SNF”) for tests covered under Medicare’s payments to the SNF and the referral of tests billable by the laboratory under Medicare Part B, then the Anti-Kickback Law would be implicated.

The OIG also has issued guidance regarding joint venture arrangements that may be viewed as suspect under the Anti-Kickback Law. These documents have relevance to clinical laboratories that are part of (or are considering establishing) joint ventures with potential sources of federal health care program business. The first guidance document, which focused on investor referrals to such ventures, was issued in 1989 and another concerning contractual joint ventures was issued in April 2003. Some of the elements of joint ventures that the OIG identified as “suspect” include: arrangements in which the capital invested by the physicians is disproportionately small and the return on investment is disproportionately large when compared to a typical investment; specific selection of investors who are in a position to make referrals to the venture; and arrangements in which one of the parties to the joint venture expands into a line of business that is dependent on referrals from the other party (sometimes called “shell” joint ventures). In a 2004 advisory opinion, the OIG expressed concern about a proposed joint venture in which a laboratory company would assist physician groups in establishing off-site pathology laboratories. The OIG indicated that the physicians’ financial and business risk in the venture was minimal and that the physicians would contract out substantially all laboratory operations, committing very little in the way of financial, capital, or human resources. The OIG was unable to exclude the possibility that the arrangement was designed to permit the laboratory to pay the physician groups for their referrals, and therefore was unwilling to find that the arrangement fell within a safe harbor or had sufficient safeguards to protect against fraud or abuse.

Violations of other fraud and abuse laws also can result in exclusion from participation in federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. One basis for such exclusion is an individual’s or entity’s submission of claims to Medicare or Medicaid that are substantially in excess of that individual’s or entity’s usual charges for like items or services. In 2003, the OIG issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that would have defined the terms “usual charges” and “substantially in excess” in ways that might have required providers, including the Company, to either lower their charges to Medicare and Medicaid or increase charges to certain other payers to avoid the risk of exclusion. On June 18, 2007, however, the OIG withdrew the proposed rule, saying it preferred to continue evaluating billing patterns on a case-by-case basis. In its withdrawal notice, the OIG also said it “remains concerned about disparities in the amounts charged to Medicare and Medicaid when compared to private payers,” that it continues to believe its exclusion authority for excess charges “provides useful backstop protection for the public fisc from providers that routinely charge Medicare or Medicaid substantially more than their other customers,” and that it will continue to use “all tools available … to address instances where Medicare or Medicaid are charged substantially more than other payers.” An enforcement action by the OIG under this statutory exclusion basis or an enforcement by Medicaid officials of similar state law restrictions could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Under another federal statute, known as the “Stark Law” or “self-referral” prohibition, physicians may not refer Medicare and Medicaid patients to providers of a broad range of designated health services with which the physicians or their immediate family members have ownership or certain other financial arrangements unless an exceptions applies, regardless of the intent of the parties. Similarly, providers may not bill Medicare for services furnished pursuant to a prohibited self-referral. There are several Stark Law exceptions, including: 1) fair market value compensation for the provision of items or services; 2) payments by physicians to a laboratory for clinical laboratory services; 3) an exception for certain ancillary services (including laboratory services) provided within the referring physician’s own office, if certain criteria are satisfied; 4) physician investment in a company whose stock is traded on a public exchange and has stockholder equity exceeding $75.0 million; and 5) certain space and equipment rental arrangements that are set at a fair market value rate and satisfy other requirements. All of the requirements of a Stark Law exception must be met to take advantage of the exception. Many states have their own self-referral laws as well, which in some cases apply to all patient referrals, not just government reimbursement programs.

There are a variety of other types of federal and state fraud and abuse laws, including laws prohibiting submission of false or fraudulent claims. The Company seeks to conduct its business in compliance with all federal and state fraud and abuse laws. The Company is unable to predict how these laws will be applied in the future, and no assurances can be given that its arrangements will not be subject to scrutiny under such laws. Sanctions for violations of these laws may include exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal or state health care programs, significant criminal and civil fines and penalties, and loss of licensure. Any exclusion from participation in a federal or state health care program, or any loss of licensure, arising from any action by any federal or state regulatory or enforcement authority, would likely have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business. In addition, any significant criminal or civil penalty resulting from such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.

Environmental, Health and Safety

The Company is subject to licensing and regulation under federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety laws and regulations relating to the handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, infectious and hazardous waste and radioactive materials. All Company laboratories are subject to applicable laws and regulations relating to biohazard disposal of all laboratory specimens and the Company generally utilizes outside vendors for disposal of such specimens. In addition, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) has established extensive requirements relating to workplace safety for health care employers, including clinical laboratories, whose workers may be exposed to blood-borne pathogens such as HIV and the hepatitis B virus. These regulations, among other things, require work practice controls, protective clothing and equipment, training, medical follow-up, vaccinations and other measures designed to minimize exposure to, and transmission of, blood-borne pathogens.

On November 6, 2000, Congress passed the Needle Stick Safety and Prevention Act, which required, among other things, that companies include in their safety programs the evaluation and use of engineering controls such as safety needles if found to be effective at reducing the risk of needle stick injuries in the workplace. The Company has implemented the use of safety needles at all of its service locations, where applicable.

Although the Company is not aware of any current material non-compliance with such federal, state and local laws and regulations, failure to comply could subject the Company to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminal penalties and/or other enforcement actions.

Drug Testing

There is no comprehensive federal law that regulates drug testing in the private sector. The Drug-Free Workplace Act does impose certain employee education requirements on companies that do business with the government, but it does not require testing, nor does it restrict testing in any way. Drug testing is allowed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because the ADA does not consider drug abuse a disability — but the law does not regulate or prohibit testing. Instead of a comprehensive regulatory system, federal law provides for specific agencies to adopt drug testing regulations for employers under their jurisdiction. As a general rule, testing is presumed to be lawful unless there is a specific restriction in state or federal law.

Controlled Substances

The use of controlled substances in testing for drugs of abuse is regulated by the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration. The Company believes that it is in compliance with these regulations as applicable.

Compliance Program

The Company continuously evaluates and monitors its compliance with all Medicare, Medicaid and other rules and regulations. The objective of the Company’s compliance program is to develop, implement, and update compliance safeguards as necessary. Emphasis is placed on developing and implementing compliance policies and guidelines, personnel training programs and various monitoring and audit procedures to attempt to achieve implementation of all applicable rules and regulations.

The Company seeks to conduct its business in compliance with all statutes, regulations, and other requirements applicable to its operations. The health care industry is, however, subject to extensive regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. There can be no assurance that applicable statutes and regulations will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect the Company. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant civil and criminal penalties, fines, exclusions from participation in government health care programs and the loss of various licenses, certificates, and authorizations, necessary to operate as well as potential liabilities from third-party claims, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.

Certificate of Need Requirements

A number of states require approval for the purchase, construction or expansion of various healthcare facilities, such as hospitals, including findings of need for additional or expanded healthcare facilities or services. Certificates of Need (“CONs”), which are issued by governmental agencies with jurisdiction over applicable healthcare facilities, are at times required for capital expenditures exceeding a prescribed amount, changes in bed capacity or the addition of services and certain other matters. Tennessee, the state in which the Big South Fork Medical Center and Tennova Healthcare-Jamestown are located, has a CON law that applies to such facilities. States periodically review, modify and revise their CON laws and related regulations.

The Company is unable to predict whether its subsidiaries’ hospitals will be able to obtain any CONs that may be necessary to accomplish their business objectives in any jurisdiction where such certificates of need are required. Violation of these state laws may result in the imposition of civil sanctions or the revocation of licenses for such facilities. In addition, future healthcare facility acquisitions also may occur in states that require CONs.

Future healthcare facility acquisitions also may occur in states that do not require CONs or which have less stringent CON requirements than the state in which Rennova currently operates a hospital. Any healthcare facility operated by the Company in such states may face increased competition from new or expanding facilities operated by competitors, including physicians.

Utilization Review Compliance and Hospital Governance

Healthcare facilities are subject to, and comply with, various forms of utilization review. In addition, under the Medicare prospective payment system, each state must have a peer review organization to carry out a federally mandated system of review of Medicare patient admissions, treatments and discharges in hospitals. Medical and surgical services and physician practices are supervised by committees of staff doctors at each healthcare facility, are overseen by each healthcare facility’s local governing board, the primary voting members of which are physicians and community members, and are reviewed by quality assurance personnel. The local governing boards also help maintain standards for quality care, develop long-range plans, establish, review and enforce practices and procedures and approve the credentials and disciplining of medical staff members.

Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (“EMTALA”) is a federal law that requires any hospital that participates in the Medicare program to conduct an appropriate medical screening examination of every person who presents to the hospital’s emergency department for treatment and, if the patient is suffering from an emergency medical condition or is in active labor, to either stabilize that condition or make an appropriate transfer of the patient to a facility that can handle the condition. The obligation to screen and stabilize emergency medical conditions exists regardless of a patient’s ability to pay for treatment. There are severe penalties under EMTALA if a hospital fails to screen or appropriately stabilize or transfer a patient or if the hospital delays appropriate treatment in order to first inquire about the patient’s ability to pay. Penalties for violations of EMTALA include civil monetary penalties and exclusion from participation in the Medicare program, the Medicaid program or both. In addition, an injured patient, the patient’s family or a medical facility that suffers a financial loss as a direct result of another hospital’s violation of the law can bring a civil suit against that other hospital. Although we believe that we comply with EMTALA, we cannot predict whether CMS will implement new requirements in the future and whether our subsidiaries’ hospitals will be able to comply with any new requirements.

Employees

As of March 16, 2018, we have 155 employees for our continuing operations, of which 98 are full time. Of our total employees from continuing operations, 7 are assigned to laboratory operations, 12 are assigned to sales and customer service, 4 are assigned to corporate administration, and 132 are assigned to our Big South Fork Medical Center. In addition, we have 18 employees associated with our discontinued operations. We continue to adjust our number of employees to achieve efficiencies and cost savings where applicable. We currently expect to have a total of approximately 134 additional hospital employees when our Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown hospital is acquired and is in full operation.

Available Information

We are required to file Annual Reports on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on a regular basis and are required to disclose certain material events in a Current Report on Form 8-K. All reports of the Company filed with the SEC are available free of charge through the SEC’s Web site at http://www.sec.gov. In addition, the public may read and copy materials filed by the Company at the SEC’s Public Reference Room located at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may also obtain additional information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

An investment in our securities is highly speculative and subject to numerous and substantial risks. These risks include those set forth herein. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below and the other information in this Annual Report before you decide to invest in our securities. If any of the following events actually occur, our business could be materially harmed. In such case, the value of your investment may decline and you may lose all or part of your investment. You should not invest in our securities unless you can afford the loss of your entire investment.

Although our financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, we have recently accumulated significant losses and have negative cash flows from operations that could adversely affect our ability to refinance existing indebtedness or raise additional capital to fund our operations or limit our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry. Restrictive covenants in the agreements governing our indebtedness may adversely affect us. These or additional risks or uncertainties not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

If we are unable to improve our liquidity position we may not be able to continue as a going concern. The accompanying consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result if we are unable to continue as a going concern and, therefore, be required to realize our assets and discharge our liabilities other than in the normal course of business, which could cause investors to suffer the loss of all or a substantial portion of their investment.

We have accumulated significant losses and have negative cash flows from operations, and at December 31, 2017, we had a working capital deficit and stockholders’ deficit of $21.5 million and $40.6 million, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, we incurred net losses attributable to common stockholders in the amount of $108.5 million and $32.6 million, respectively. In addition, our cash position is critically deficient, critical payments are not being made in the ordinary course of business, we have indebtedness for which we do not have the financial resources to satisfy, all of which raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We continue to consider efficiencies and are currently using one laboratory for the majority of our toxicology diagnostics thereby reducing the number of employees and associated operating expenses, in order to reduce costs. In addition, we have received approximately $15.7 million in cash from the issuances of debentures and warrants during 2017 (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements), $4.3 million from related parties (see Notes 7 and 8 to the consolidated financial statements) and an additional $4.0 million of proceeds on October 30, 2017 from the issuance of our convertible preferred stock (see Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements). Subsequent to December 31, 2017, we received $2 million from the issuance of debentures and $0.8 million from the sale of stock we owned (see Note 20).

On July 12, 2017, the Company announced plans to spin off its Advanced Molecular Services Group (“AMSG”) and in the third quarter 2017 the Company’s Board of Directors voted unanimously to spin off the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Health Technology Solutions, Inc. (“HTS”), as independent publicly traded companies by way of tax-free distributions to the Company’s stockholders. Completion of these spinoffs is expected to occur in the third quarter of 2018. The Board of Directors is currently considering if AMSG and HTS would be better as one combined spinoff instead of two. The spinoffs are subject to numerous conditions, including effectiveness of Registration Statements on Form 10 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and consents, including under various funding agreements previously entered into by the Company. A record date to determine those stockholders entitled to receive shares in the spinoffs should be approximately 30 to 60 days prior to the dates of the spinoffs. The strategic goal of the spinoffs is to create three (or two) public companies, each of which can focus on its own strengths and operational plans. In addition, after the spinoffs, each company will provide a distinct and targeted investment opportunity.

In accordance with ASC 205-20 and having met the criteria for “held for sale”, we have reflected amounts relating to AMSG and HTS as disposal groups classified as held for sale and included as part of discontinued operations. AMSG and HTS are no longer included in the segment reporting following the reclassification to discontinued operations. The discontinued operations of AMSG and HTS are described further in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements.

We also announced that the Big South Fork Medical Center received CMS regional office licensure approval and opened its doors on August 8, 2017. The hospital provided services to over 3,747 patients and recognized approximately $2.0 million of gross revenues during 2017. In addition, on January 31, 2018, we announced that we had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement to acquire an acute care hospital in Jamestown, Tennessee known as Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve our business plan, raise any additional capital or secure the additional financing necessary to implement our current operating plan. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon our ability to significantly reduce our operating costs, increase our revenues and eventually regain profitable operations. The accompanying consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if we are unable to continue as a going concern.

The proposed spin offs of our Advanced Molecular Services Group and Health Technology Solutions are subject to various risks and uncertainties and may not be completed on the terms or timeline currently contemplated, if at all, and will involve significant time and expense, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In July 2017, we announced plans to separate our Advanced Molecular Services Group and Health Technology Solutions businesses as independent, publicly-traded companies. The transactions are expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2018, subject to satisfaction of certain conditions. Unanticipated developments could delay, prevent or otherwise adversely affect one or both of these proposed spin offs, including but not limited to disruptions in general market conditions or potential problems, delays or difficulties in satisfying conditions and obtaining approvals and clearances or litigation or other legal proceedings that may arise as a result of the proposed spin offs. In addition, consummation of the spin offs will require final approval from our Board of Directors. Therefore, we cannot assure that we will be able to complete the spin offs on the terms or on the timeline that we announced, if at all.

We will incur significant expenses in connection with the spin offs, and such costs and expenses may be greater than we anticipate. In addition, completion of the spin offs will require a significant amount of management time and effort which may disrupt our business or otherwise divert management’s attention from other aspects of our business operations. Any such difficulties could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The proposed spin offs may not achieve some or all of the anticipated benefits.

If the spin offs are completed, there is uncertainty as to whether the anticipated operational, financial and strategic benefits of the spin offs will be achieved. There can be no assurance that the combined value of the common stock of the publicly-traded companies will be equal to or greater than what the value of our common stock would have been had the proposed separations not occurred. The combined value of the common stock of the companies could be lower than anticipated for a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the inability of the new spin off companies to operate and compete effectively as independent entities, and the stock price of the common stock of each of the companies could experience periods of volatility. If we fail to achieve the anticipated benefits of the spin offs, our stock price could decline.

If either spin off does not qualify as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we and our stockholders could be subject to significant tax liabilities.

We intend to obtain an opinion of outside counsel regarding the qualification of the distribution in each spin off, together with certain related transactions, as a transaction that is generally tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The opinion will be based on and rely on, among other things, certain facts and assumptions, as well as certain representations, statements and undertakings of Rennova and the new spin off company, including those relating to the past and future conduct of Rennova and the new spin off company. If any of these facts, assumptions, representations, statements or undertakings are, or become, inaccurate or incomplete, or if we or the new spin off company breach any of their respective covenants in the separation documents, the opinion of counsel may be invalid and the conclusions reached therein could be jeopardized. It is also possible that the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, could determine that the distribution in the spin off, together with certain related transactions, is taxable for U.S. federal income tax purposes if it determines that any of these facts, assumptions, representations, statements or undertakings are incorrect or have been violated or if it disagrees with the conclusions in the opinion of counsel. An opinion of counsel is not binding on the IRS or any court and there can be no assurance that the IRS will not challenge the conclusions reached in the opinion. If the distribution in the spin off, together with certain related transactions, is ultimately determined to be taxable, we and our stockholders that are subject to U.S. federal income tax could incur significant tax liabilities.

Our common stock is no longer listed on the NASDAQ.

On April 18, 2017, we were notified by NASDAQ that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fell below the $2.5 million minimum requirement for continued listing under The Nasdaq Capital Market’s Listing Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Rule”). In accordance with the Rule, we submitted a plan to Nasdaq outlining how we intended to regain compliance. On August 17, 2017, Nasdaq notified us that our plan to correct the stockholders’ equity deficiency did not contain sufficient evidence to support a correction being achieved in the required time frame. We appealed this decision to a Hearing Panel which, on October 23, 2017, maintained this position and denied us a continued listing. Effective October 25, 2017, our common stock (RNVA) and warrants to purchase common stock (RNVAW) were no longer listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market but began trading on the OTCQB instead. The OTCQB is an electronic quotation system that displays real-time quotes, last sale prices, and volume information for many over the counter securities that are not listed on a national securities exchange. OTCQB quotations for our common stock and common stock warrant prices may not represent the true market value of our common stock.

Our acquisition of the Big South Fork Medical Center and intended purchase of an additional hospital does not provide assurance that the acquired operations will be accretive to our earnings or otherwise improve our results of operations.

Acquisitions, such as that of the Hospital Assets of the Big South Fork Medical Center, which were acquired in January of 2017 and that began operations on August 8, 2017, involve the integration of previously separate businesses into a common enterprise in which it is envisioned that synergistic operations will be result in improved financial performance. However, realization of these envisioned results is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to:

There is no assurance that the acquisition of the Big South Fork Medical Center or the planned acquisition of Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown will be accretive to our earnings or otherwise improve our results of operations.

We have decided to alter our business model to include hospital acquisition and development which may not succeed if we are unable to effectively compete for patients. Local residents could use other hospitals and healthcare providers.

The healthcare industry is highly competitive among hospitals and other healthcare providers for patients, affiliations with physicians and acquisitions. The most significant competition our hospital(s) face comes from hospitals that provide more complex services, other healthcare providers, including outpatient surgery, orthopedic, oncology and diagnostic centers that also compete for patients. Our hospitals, our competitors, and other healthcare industry participants are increasingly implementing physician alignment strategies, such as acquiring physician practice groups, employing physicians and participating in ACOs or other clinical integration models, which may impact our competitive position. In addition, increasing consolidation within the payor industry, vertical integration efforts involving payors and healthcare providers, and cost-reduction strategies by large employer groups and their affiliates may impact our ability to contract with payors on favorable terms and otherwise affect our competitive position.

Trends toward clinical transparency and value-based purchasing may have an unanticipated impact on our competitive position and patient volumes.

We expect these competitive trends to continue. If we are unable to compete effectively with other hospitals and other healthcare providers, local residents may seek healthcare services at providers other than our hospitals and affiliated businesses.

The failure to obtain our medical supplies at favorable prices for our hospital division could cause our operating results to decline. Higher costs could adversely impact our operating results.

Our results of operations may be adversely affected if the ACA is repealed, replaced or otherwise changed.

The ACA has increased the number of people with health care insurance. It also has reduced Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements. Numerous proposals continue to be discussed in Congress and the administration to repeal, amend or replace the law. We cannot predict whether any such repeal, amend or replace proposals, or any parts of them, will become law and, if they do, what their substance or timing will be. Any of the foregoing, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our business could be harmed from the loss or suspension of a license or imposition of a fine or penalties under, or future changes or changing interpretations of, CLIA or state laboratory licensing laws to which we are subject.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is subject to extensive federal and state regulation, and many of these statutes and regulations have not been interpreted by the courts. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, or CLIA, are federal regulatory standards that apply to virtually all clinical laboratories (regardless of the location, size or type of laboratory), including those operated by physicians in their offices, by requiring that they be certified by the federal government or by a federally approved accreditation agency. CLIA does not preempt state law, which in some cases may be more stringent than federal law and require additional personnel qualifications, quality control, record maintenance and proficiency testing. The sanction for failure to comply with CLIA and state requirements may be suspension, revocation or limitation of a laboratory’s CLIA certificate, which is necessary to conduct business, as well as significant fines and/or criminal penalties. Many other states have similar laws and we may be subject to similar penalties.

We cannot assure you that applicable statutes and regulations will not be interpreted or applied by a prosecutorial, regulatory or judicial authority in a manner that would adversely affect our business. Potential sanctions for violation of these statutes and regulations include significant fines and the suspension or loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on us, which may be costly.

Healthcare plans have taken steps to control the utilization and reimbursement of healthcare services.

We also face efforts by non-governmental third-party payers, including healthcare plans, to reduce utilization and reimbursement for healthcare services.

The healthcare industry has experienced a trend of consolidation among healthcare insurance plans and payers, resulting in fewer but larger insurance plans with significant bargaining power to negotiate fee arrangements with healthcare providers. These healthcare plans, and independent physician associations, may demand that providers accept discounted fee structures or assume all or a portion of the financial risk associated with providing services to their members through capped payment arrangements. In addition, some healthcare plans have been willing to limit the PPO or Point of Service (“POS”) laboratory network to only a single national laboratory to obtain improved fee-for-service pricing. There are also an increasing number of patients enrolling in consumer driven products and high deductible plans that involve greater patient cost-sharing.

The increased consolidation among healthcare plans and payers increases the potential adverse impact of ceasing to be a contracted provider with any such insurer. The Health Care Reform Law includes provisions, including ones regarding the creation of healthcare exchanges, which may encourage healthcare insurance plans to increase exclusive contracting.

We expect continuing efforts to reduce reimbursements, to impose more stringent cost controls and to reduce utilization of services. These efforts, including future changes in third-party payer rules, practices and policies or ceasing to be a contracted provider to many healthcare plans, have had and may continue to have a material adverse effect on our business.

Unless we raise sufficient funds, we will not be able to succeed in our business model.

During the year ended December 31, 2017 and through the date of this report, we have relied on the sale of our equity securities, a loan from a related party and convertible debentures to fund our operations. We generated negative cash flow from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016. If this trend were to continue and we are unable to raise sufficient capital to fund our operations through other sources, our business will be adversely affected, and we may not be able to continue as a going concern (see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, “Liquidity and Capital Resources”). There can be no assurances that we will be able to raise sufficient funds on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all, to fund our operations under our current business model.

Regulation by the FDA of LDTs and clinical laboratories may result in significant change, and our business could be adversely impacted if we fail to adapt.

High complexity, CLIA-certified laboratories, such as ours, frequently develop testing procedures to provide diagnostic results to customers. These tests have been traditionally offered by nearly all complex laboratories for the last few decades and LDTs are subject to CMS oversight through its enforcement of CLIA. The FDA, which regulates the development and use of medical devices, has claimed that it has regulatory authority over LDTs, but has not exercised enforcement with respect to most LDTs offered by high complexity laboratories, and not sought to require these laboratories to comply with FDA regulations regarding medical devices. During 2010, the FDA publicly announced that it has decided to exercise regulatory authority over these LDTs, and that it plans to issue guidance to the industry regarding its regulatory approach. At that time, the FDA indicated that it would use a risk-based approach to regulation and would direct more resources to tests with wider distribution and with the highest risk of injury, but that it will be sensitive to the need to not adversely impact patient care or innovation. In September 2014, the FDA announced its framework and timetable for implementing this guidance. On November 18, 2016, the FDA announced it would not release final guidance at this time and instead would continue to work with stakeholders, the new administration and Congress to determine the right approach, and on January 3, 2017, the FDA released a discussion paper outlining a possible risk-based approach for FDA and CMS oversight of LDTs. Later in 2017, the FDA indicated that Congress should enact legislation to address improved oversight of diagnostics, including LTDs, rather than the FDA addressing the issue through administrative proposals. We cannot predict the ultimate timing or form of any such guidance or regulation or their potential impact. If adopted, such a regulatory approach by the FDA may lead to an increased regulatory burden, including additional costs and delays in introducing new tests. While the ultimate impact of the FDA’s approach is unknown, it may be extensive and may result in significant change. Our failure to adapt to these changes could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Some of our operations are subject to federal and state laws prohibiting “kickbacks” and other laws designed to prohibit payments for referrals and eliminate healthcare fraud.

Federal and state anti-kickback and similar laws prohibit payment, or offers of payment, in exchange for referrals of products and services for which reimbursement may be made by Medicare or other federal and state healthcare programs. Some state laws contain similar prohibitions that apply without regard to the payer of reimbursement for the services. Under a federal statute, known as the “Stark Law” or “self-referral” prohibition, physicians, subject to certain exceptions, are prohibited from referring their Medicare or Medicaid program patients to providers with which the physicians or their immediate family members have a financial relationship, and the providers are prohibited from billing for services rendered in violation of Stark Law referral prohibitions. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Law and Stark Law may be punished by civil and criminal penalties, and/or exclusion from participation in federal health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. States may impose similar penalties. The Health Care Reform Law significantly strengthened provisions of the Federal False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Law provisions, and other health care fraud provisions, leading to the possibility of greatly increased qui tam suits by private citizen “relators” for perceived violations of these laws. There can be no assurance that our activities will not come under the scrutiny of regulators and other government authorities or that our practices will not be found to violate applicable laws, rules and regulations or prompt lawsuits by private citizen relators under federal or state false claims laws.

Federal officials responsible for administering and enforcing the healthcare laws and regulations have made a priority of eliminating healthcare fraud. For example, the Health Care Reform Law includes significant new fraud and abuse measures, including required disclosures of financial arrangements with physician customers, lower thresholds for violations and increased potential penalties for violations. Federal funding available for combating health care fraud and abuse generally has increased. While we seek to conduct our business in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, many of the laws and regulations applicable to our business, particularly those relating to billing and reimbursement of services and those relating to relationships with physicians, hospitals and patients, contain language that has not been interpreted by courts. We must rely on our interpretation of these laws and regulations based on the advice of our counsel and regulatory or law enforcement authorities may not agree with our interpretation of these laws and regulations and may seek to enforce legal remedies or penalties against us for violations.

From time to time we may need to change our operations, particularly pricing or billing practices, in response to changing interpretations of these laws and regulations, or regulatory or judicial determinations with respect to these laws and regulations. These occurrences, regardless of their outcome, could damage our reputation and harm important business relationships that we have with healthcare providers, payers and others. Furthermore, if a regulatory or judicial authority finds that we have not complied with applicable laws and regulations, we would be required to refund amounts that were billed and collected in violation of such laws and regulations. In addition, we may voluntarily refund amounts that were alleged to have been billed and collected in violation of applicable laws and regulations. In either case, we could suffer civil and criminal damages, fines and penalties, exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs and the loss of licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, as well as incur liabilities from third-party claims, all of which could harm our operating results and financial condition.

Moreover, regardless of the outcome, if we or physicians or other third parties with whom we do business are investigated by a regulatory or law enforcement authority we could incur substantial costs, including legal fees, and our management may be required to divert a substantial amount of time to an investigation.

To enhance compliance with applicable health care laws, and mitigate potential liability in the event of noncompliance, regulatory authorities, such as the OIG, have recommended the adoption and implementation of a comprehensive health care compliance program that generally contains the elements of an effective compliance and ethics program described in Section 8B2.1 of the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual, and for many years the OIG has made available a model compliance program. In addition, certain states require that health care providers that engage in substantial business under the state Medicaid program have a compliance program that generally adheres to the standards set forth in the Model Compliance Program. Also, under the Health Care Reform Law, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, will require suppliers, such as the Company, to adopt, as a condition of Medicare participation, compliance programs that meet a core set of requirements. While we have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, healthcare compliance and ethics programs that generally incorporate the OIG’s recommendations, and training our applicable employees in such compliance, having such a program can be no assurance that we will avoid any compliance issues.

We conduct our business in a heavily regulated industry and changes in regulations or violations of regulations could, directly or indirectly, harm our operating results and financial condition.

The healthcare industry is highly regulated and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely in the future. Areas of the regulatory environment that may affect our ability to conduct business include, without limitation:

These laws and regulations are extremely complex and in many instances, there are no significant regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. Any determination that we have violated these laws or regulations, or the public announcement that we are being investigated for possible violations of these laws or regulations, could harm our operating results and financial condition. In addition, a significant change in any of these laws or regulations may require us to change our business model in order to maintain compliance with these laws or regulations, which could harm our operating results and financial condition.

Failure to comply with complex federal and state laws and regulations related to submission of claims for services can result in significant monetary damages and penalties and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid Programs.

We are subject to extensive federal and state laws and regulations relating to the submission of claims for payment for services, including those that relate to coverage of our services under Medicare, Medicaid and other governmental health care programs, the amounts that may be billed for our services and to whom claims for services may be submitted.

Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could result in our inability to receive payment for our services or result in attempts by third-party payers, such as Medicare and Medicaid, to recover payments from us that have already been made. Submission of claims in violation of certain statutory or regulatory requirements can result in penalties, including substantial civil money penalties for each item or service billed to Medicare in violation of the legal requirement, and exclusion from participation in Medicare and Medicaid. Government authorities may also assert that violations of laws and regulations related to submission or causing the submission of claims violate the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) or other laws related to fraud and abuse, including submission of claims for services that were not medically necessary. Violations of the FCA could result in enormous economic liability. The FCA provides that all damages are trebled. For example, we could be subject to FCA liability if it was determined that the services we provided were not medically necessary and not reimbursable, particularly if it were asserted that we contributed to the physician’s referrals of unnecessary services to us. It is also possible that the government could attempt to hold us liable under fraud and abuse laws for improper claims submitted by an entity for services that we performed if we were found to have knowingly participated in the arrangement that resulted in submission of the improper claims.

We continuously conduct internal audits on current and historical billings to protect against errors related to any of the above. One of these audits has led us to retain an independent consulting firm to assess if any violations to the foregoing regulations have occurred in the historical billings by our laboratories. If the review determines that any overpayment was received, we will inform the relative party and make arrangements to repay any overpayment. Medicare and Medicaid have continued to be a very small percentage of our total business.

Changes in regulation and policies, including increasing downward pressure on health care reimbursement, may adversely affect reimbursement for our services and could have a material adverse impact on our business.

Reimbursement levels for health care services are subject to continuous and often unexpected changes in policies, and we face a variety of efforts by government payers to reduce utilization and reimbursement for our services. Changes in governmental reimbursement may result from statutory and regulatory changes, retroactive rate adjustments, administrative rulings, competitive bidding initiatives, and other policy changes.

The U.S. Congress has considered, at least yearly in conjunction with budgetary legislation, changes to the Medicare fee schedules under which we receive reimbursement. For example, currently there is no copayment or coinsurance required for clinical laboratory services. However, Congress has periodically considered imposing a 20 percent coinsurance on laboratory services. If enacted, this would require us to attempt to collect this amount from patients, although in many cases the costs of collection would exceed the amount actually received.

The CMS pays laboratories on the basis of a fee schedule that is reviewed and re-calculated on an annual basis. CMS may change the fee schedule upward or downward on billing codes that we submit for reimbursement on a regular basis; our revenue and business may be adversely affected if the reimbursement rates associated with such codes are reduced. Even when reimbursement rates are not reduced, policy changes add to our costs by increasing the complexity and volume of administrative requirements. Medicaid reimbursement, which varies by state, is also subject to administrative and billing requirements and budget pressures. Recently, state budget pressures have caused states to consider several policy changes that may impact our financial condition and results of operations, such as delaying payments, reducing reimbursement, restricting coverage eligibility and service coverage, and imposing taxes on our services.

Failure to timely or accurately bill for our services could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Billing for medical services is extremely complicated and is subject to extensive and non-uniform rules and administrative requirements. Depending on the billing arrangement and applicable law, we bill various payers, such as patients, insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid, physicians, hospitals and employer groups. Changes in laws and regulations could increase the complexity and cost of our billing process. Additionally, auditing for compliance with applicable laws and regulations as well as internal compliance policies and procedures adds further cost and complexity to the billing process. Further, our billing systems require significant technology investment and, as a result of marketplace demands, we need to continually invest in our billing systems.

Missing, incomplete, or incorrect information on requisitions adds complexity to and slows the billing process, creates backlogs of unbilled requisitions, and generally increases the aging of accounts receivable and bad debt expense. Failure to timely or correctly bill may lead to our not being reimbursed for our services or an increase in the aging of our accounts receivable, which could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. Failure to comply with applicable laws relating to billing or even having to pay back amounts incorrectly billed and collected could lead to various penalties, including: (1) exclusion from participation in CMS and other government programs; (2) asset forfeitures; (3) civil and criminal fines and penalties; and (4) the loss of various licenses, certificates and authorizations necessary to operate our business, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or cash flows.

There have been times when our accounts receivable have increased at a greater rate than revenue growth and, therefore, have adversely affected our cash flows from operations. We have taken steps to implement systems and processing changes intended to improve billing procedures and related collection results. However, we cannot assure that our ongoing assessment of accounts receivable will not result in the need for additional provisions. Such additional provisions, if implemented, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

During the last half of 2014 and the first three quarters of 2015, the Company experienced difficulty in delivering accurate electronic submissions to third party payers. The difficulties arose from a variety of factors, including pressure, scrutiny and requirement for additional information from payers related to toxicology services, difficulty complying with CMS’s new HCPCS codes for toxicology services, difficulty in accurately billing for internal reference laboratory work, and complications arising from the implementation of new billing technology. These difficulties have a significant impact on the time it takes the Company to collect its receivables and consequently on its cash flow from operations. The Company believes that these difficulties were corrected in the fourth quarter of 2015, but there can be no assurance that CMS and other third party payers will not change their requirements resulting in further billing related difficulties.

Our operations may be adversely impacted by the effects of extreme weather conditions, natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes, health pandemics, hostilities or acts of terrorism and other criminal activities.

Our operations are always subject to adverse impacts resulting from extreme weather conditions, natural disasters, health pandemics, hostilities or acts of terrorism or other criminal activities. Such events may result in a temporary decline in the number of patients who seek our services or in our employees’ ability to perform their job duties. In addition, such events may temporarily interrupt our ability to transport specimens, to receive materials from our suppliers or otherwise to provide our services. The occurrence of any such event and/or a disruption of our operations as a result may adversely affect our results of operations.

Increased competition, including price competition, could have a material adverse impact on our net revenues and profitability.

We operate in a business that is characterized by intense competition. Our major competitors include large national laboratories and hospitals that possess greater name recognition, larger customer bases, and significantly greater financial resources and employ substantially more personnel than we do. Many of our competitors have long established relationships. We cannot assure you that we will be able to compete successfully with such entities in the future.

The healthcare business is intensely competitive both in terms of price and service. Pricing of services is often one of the most significant factors used by patients, health care providers and third-party payers in selecting a provider. As a result of the healthcare industry undergoing significant consolidation, larger providers are able to increase cost efficiencies. This consolidation results in greater price competition. We may be unable to increase cost efficiencies sufficiently, if at all, and as a result, our net earnings and cash flows could be negatively impacted by such price competition. We may also face competition from companies that do not comply with existing laws or regulations or otherwise disregard compliance standards in the industry. Additionally, we may also face changes in fee schedules, competitive bidding for services or other actions or pressures reducing payment schedules as a result of increased or additional competition. Additional competition, including price competition, could have a material adverse impact on our net revenues and profitability.

Failure to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act and the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act, could result in fines and penalties and loss of licensure, and have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s business.

The Company is subject to licensing and regulation under federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety, including laws and regulations relating to the handling, transportation and disposal of medical specimens, and infectious and hazardous waste materials, as well as regulations relating to the safety and health of employees. All of the Company’s laboratories are subject to applicable federal and state laws and regulations relating to biohazard disposal of all laboratory specimens, and they utilize outside vendors for disposal of such specimens. In addition, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration has established extensive requirements relating to workplace safety for health care employers, including clinical laboratories, whose workers may be exposed to blood-borne pathogens such as HIV and the hepatitis B virus. These requirements, among other things, require work practice controls, protective clothing and equipment, training, medical follow-up, vaccinations and other measures designed to minimize exposure to, and transmission of, blood-borne pathogens. In addition, the Needlestick Safety and Prevention Act requires, among other things, that the Company include in its safety programs the evaluation and use of emergency controls such as safety needles if found to be effective at reducing the risk of needlestick injuries in the workplace.

Failure to comply with federal, state and local laws and regulations could subject the Company to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminal penalties and/or other enforcement actions which would have a material adverse effect on its business. In addition, compliance with future legislation could impose additional requirements on the Company which may be costly.

Regulations requiring the use of “standard transactions” for health care services issued under HIPAA may negatively impact the Company’s profitability and cash flows.

Pursuant to HIPAA, the Secretary of Health and Human Services has issued regulations designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care system by facilitating the electronic exchange of information in certain financial and administrative transactions while protecting the privacy and security of the information exchanged.

The HIPAA transaction standards are complex, and subject to differences in interpretation by payers. For instance, some payers may interpret the standards to require the Company to provide certain types of information, including demographic information not usually provided to the Company by physicians. As a result of inconsistent application of transaction standards by payers or the Company’s inability to obtain certain billing information not usually provided to the Company by physicians, the Company could face increased costs and complexity, a temporary disruption in receipts and ongoing reductions in reimbursements and net revenues. In addition, new requirements for additional standard transactions, such as claims attachments and the ICD-10-CM Code Set, could prove technically difficult, time-consuming or expensive to implement.

Failure to maintain the security of customer-related information or compliance with security requirements could damage the Company’s reputation with customers, and cause it to incur substantial additional costs and to become subject to litigation.

Pursuant to HIPAA and certain similar state laws, we must comply with comprehensive privacy and security standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information. Under the HITECH amendments to HIPAA, HIPAA was expanded to require certain data breach notifications, to extend certain HIPAA privacy and security standards directly to business associates, to heighten penalties for noncompliance and to enhance enforcement efforts.

The Company receives certain personal and financial information about its customers. In addition, the Company depends upon the secure transmission of confidential information over public networks, including information permitting cashless payments. A compromise in the Company’s security systems that results in customer personal information being obtained by unauthorized persons or the Company’s failure to comply with security requirements for financial transactions could adversely affect the Company’s reputation with its customers and others, as well as the Company’s results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. It could also result in litigation against the Company or the imposition of penalties.

Failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to comply with the ICD-10-CM Code Set and our failure to comply with other emerging electronic transmission standards could adversely affect our business.

The Company believes that it is in compliance in all material respects with the current Transactions and Code Sets Rule. The Company implemented Version 5010 of the HIPAA Transaction Standards, and believes it has fully adopted the ICD-10-CM code set. The compliance date for ICD-10-CM was October 1, 2015. Clinical laboratories are typically required to submit health care claims with diagnosis codes to third party payers. The diagnosis codes must be obtained from the ordering physician. The failure of the Company, third party payers or physicians to transition within the required timeframe could have an adverse impact on reimbursement, day’s sales outstanding and cash collections.

Also, the failure of our IT systems to keep pace with technological advances may significantly reduce our revenues or increase our expenses. Public and private initiatives to create healthcare information technology (“HCIT”) standards and to mandate standardized clinical coding systems for the electronic exchange of clinical information, including test orders and test results, could require costly modifications to our existing HCIT systems. While we do not expect HCIT standards to be adopted or implemented without adequate time to comply, if we fail to adopt or delay in implementing HCIT standards, we could lose customers and business opportunities.

Compliance with the HIPAA security regulations and privacy regulations may increase the Company’s costs.

The HIPAA privacy and security regulations, including the expanded requirements under HITECH, establish comprehensive federal standards with respect to the use and disclosure of protected health information by health plans, healthcare providers and healthcare clearinghouses, in addition to setting standards to protect the confidentiality, integrity and security of protected health information. The regulations establish a complex regulatory framework on a variety of subjects, including:

The Company has implemented policies and procedures related to compliance with the HIPAA privacy and security regulations, as required by law. The privacy and security regulations establish a “floor” and do not supersede state laws that are more stringent. Therefore, the Company is required to comply with both federal privacy and security regulations and varying state privacy and security laws. In addition, for healthcare data transfers from other countries relating to citizens of those countries, the Company may also be required to comply with the laws of those other countries. The federal privacy regulations restrict the Company’s ability to use or disclose patient identifiable laboratory data, without patient authorization, for purposes other than payment, treatment or healthcare operations (as defined by HIPAA), except for disclosures for various public policy purposes and other permitted purposes outlined in the privacy regulations. HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, provides for significant fines and other penalties for wrongful use or disclosure of protected health information in violation of the privacy and security regulations, including potential civil and criminal fines and penalties. Due to the enactment of HITECH and an increase in the amount of monetary financial penalties, government enforcement has also increased. It is not possible to predict what the extent of the impact on business will be, other than heightened scrutiny and emphasis on compliance. If the Company does not comply with existing or new laws and regulations related to protecting the privacy and security of health information it could be subject to significant monetary fines, civil penalties or criminal sanctions. In addition, other federal and state laws that protect the privacy and security of patient information may be subject to enforcement and interpretations by various governmental authorities and courts resulting in complex compliance issues. For example, the Company could incur damages under state laws pursuant to an action brought by a private party for the wrongful use or disclosure of confidential health information or other private personal information.

The clinical laboratory industry is subject to changing technology and new product introductions.

Advances in technology may lead to the development of more cost-effective technologies such as point-of-care testing equipment that can be operated by physicians or other healthcare providers in their offices or by patients themselves without requiring the services of freestanding clinical laboratories. Development of such technology and its use by the Company’s customers could reduce the demand for its laboratory testing services and negatively impact its revenues.

Currently, most clinical laboratory testing is categorized as “high” or “moderate” complexity, and thereby is subject to extensive and costly regulation under CLIA. The cost of compliance with CLIA makes it impractical for most physicians to operate clinical laboratories in their offices, and other laws limit the ability of physicians to have ownership in a laboratory and to refer tests to such a laboratory. Manufacturers of laboratory equipment and test kits could seek to increase their sales by marketing point-of-care laboratory equipment to physicians and by selling test kits approved for home or physician office use to both physicians and patients. Diagnostic tests approved for home use are automatically deemed to be “waived” tests under CLIA and may be performed in physician office laboratories as well as by patients in their homes with minimal regulatory oversight. Other tests meeting certain FDA criteria also may be classified as “waived” for CLIA purposes. The FDA has regulatory responsibility over instruments, test kits, reagents and other devices used by clinical laboratories and has taken responsibility from the CDC for classifying the complexity of tests for CLIA purposes. Increased approval of “waived” test kits could lead to increased testing by physicians in their offices or by patients at home, which could affect the Company’s market for laboratory testing services and negatively impact its revenues.

Health care reform and related programs (e.g. Health Insurance Exchanges), changes in government payment and reimbursement systems, or changes in payer mix, including an increase in capitated reimbursement mechanisms and evolving delivery models, could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s net revenues, profitability and cash flow.

Our services are billed to private patients, Medicare, Medicaid, commercial clients, managed care organizations (“MCOs”) and third-party insurance companies. Bills may be sent to different payers depending on the medical insurance benefits of a particular patient. Most testing services are billed to a party other than the physician or other authorized person that ordered the test. Increases in the percentage of services billed to government and managed care payers could have an adverse impact on the Company’s net revenues.

The various MCOs have different contracting philosophies, which are influenced by the design of the products they offer to their members. Some MCOs contract with a limited number of clinical laboratories and engage in direct negotiation of the rates reimbursed to participating laboratories. Other MCOs adopt broader networks with a largely uniform fee structure offered to all participating clinical laboratories. In addition, some MCOs have used capitation in an effort to fix the cost of laboratory testing services for their enrollees. Under a capitated reimbursement mechanism, the clinical laboratory and the managed care organization agree to a per member, per month payment to pay for all authorized laboratory tests ordered during the month by the physician for the members, regardless of the number or cost of the tests actually performed. Capitation shifts the risk of increased test utilization (and the underlying mix of testing services) to the clinical laboratory provider.

A portion of the third-party insurance fee-for-service revenues are collectible from patients in the form of deductibles, copayments and coinsurance. As patient cost-sharing increases, collectability may be impacted.

In addition, Medicare and Medicaid and private insurers have increased their efforts to control the cost, utilization and delivery of health care services, including clinical laboratory services. Measures to regulate health care delivery in general, and clinical laboratories in particular, have resulted in reduced prices, added costs and decreased test utilization for the clinical laboratory industry by increasing complexity and adding new regulatory and administrative requirements. Pursuant to legislation passed in late 2003, the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare managed care plans has increased. The percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans has also increased, and is expected to continue to increase. Changes to, or repeal of, the Health Care Reform Law, the health care reform legislation passed in 2010, also may continue to affect coverage, reimbursement, and utilization of laboratory services, as well as administrative requirements, in ways that are currently unpredictable.

The Company expects efforts to impose reduced reimbursement, more stringent payment policies and cost controls by government and other payers to continue. If the Company cannot offset additional reductions in the payments it receives for its services by reducing costs, increasing test volume or the volume of its other services and/or introducing new procedures, it could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s net revenues, profitability and cash flows.

As an employer, health care reform legislation also contains numerous regulations that will require the Company to implement significant process and record keeping changes to be in compliance. These changes increase the cost of providing healthcare coverage to employees and their families. Given the limited release of regulations to guide compliance, as well as potential changes to or repeal of the Health Care Reform Law, the exact impact to employers including the Company is uncertain.

A failure to obtain and retain new customers, a loss of existing customers or material contracts, a reduction in tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, or the inability to retain existing and create new relationships with health systems could impact the Company’s ability to successfully grow its business.

To offset efforts by payers to reduce the cost and utilization of clinical laboratory services and to otherwise grow its business, the Company needs to obtain and retain new customers and business partners. In addition, a reduction in tests ordered or specimens submitted by existing customers, without offsetting growth in its customer base, could impact the Company’s ability to successfully grow its business and could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s net revenues and profitability. The Company competes in its laboratory business primarily on the basis of the quality of testing, timeliness of test reporting, reporting and information systems, reputation in the medical community, the pricing of services and ability to employ qualified personnel. The Company’s failure to successfully compete on any of these factors could result in the loss of customers and a reduction in the Company’s ability to expand its customer base.

In addition, as the broader healthcare industry trend of consolidation continues, including the acquisition of physician practices by health systems, relationships with hospital-based health systems and integrated delivery networks are becoming more important. The Company’s inability to create relationships with those provider systems and networks could impact its ability to successfully grow its business.

A failure to identify and successfully close and integrate strategic acquisition targets could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business objectives and its net revenues and profitability.

Part of the Company’s strategy involves deploying capital in investments that enhance the Company’s business, which includes pursuing strategic acquisitions to strengthen the Company’s capabilities and increase its presence in key geographic areas. Since January 1, 2013, the Company has acquired the Big South Fork Medical Center, clinical laboratories in California, New Jersey and New Mexico in addition to Clinlab, Medical Mime and CollabRx. The acquisition of Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018. However, the Company cannot assure that it will be able to identify acquisition targets that are attractive to the Company or that are of a large enough size to have a meaningful impact on the Company’s operating results. Furthermore, the successful closing and integration of a strategic acquisition entails numerous risks, including, among others:

The Company cannot assure that current or future acquisitions, if any, or any related integration efforts will be successful, or that the Company’s business will not be adversely affected by any future acquisitions, including with respect to net revenues and profitability. Even if the Company is able to successfully integrate the operations of businesses that it may acquire in the future, the Company may not be able to realize the benefits that it expects from such acquisitions.

Adverse results in material litigation matters or governmental inquiries could have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s business and financial condition.

The Company may become subject in the ordinary course of business to material legal action related to, among other things, intellectual property disputes, professional liability, contracts and employee-related matters, as well as inquiries and requests for information from governmental agencies and bodies and Medicare or Medicaid carriers requesting comment and/or information on allegations of billing irregularities, billing and pricing arrangements and other matters that are brought to their attention through billing audits or third parties. The healthcare industry is subject to substantial Federal and state government regulation and audit. Legal actions could result in substantial monetary damages as well as damage to the Company’s reputation with customers, which could have a material adverse effect upon its business.

As a company with limited capital and human resources, we anticipate that more of management’s time and attention will be diverted from our business to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements than would be the case with a company that has well established controls and procedures. This diversion of management’s time and attention may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the event we identify significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting that we cannot remediate in a timely manner, or if we are unable to receive a positive attestation from our independent registered public accounting firm with respect to our internal control over financial reporting when we are required to do so, investors and others may lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements. If this occurs, the trading price of our common stock, if any, and ability to obtain any necessary equity or debt financing could suffer. In addition, in the event that our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to rely on our internal control over financial reporting in connection with its audit of our financial statements, and in the further event that it is unable to devise alternative procedures in order to satisfy itself as to the material accuracy of our financial statements and related disclosures, we may be unable to file our periodic reports with the SEC. This would likely have an adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock, if any, and our ability to secure any necessary additional financing, and could result in the delisting of our common stock. In such event, the liquidity of our common stock would be severely limited and the market price of our common stock would likely decline significantly.

An inability to attract and retain experienced and qualified personnel could adversely affect the Company’s business.

The loss of key management personnel or the inability to attract and retain experienced and qualified employees at the Company’s clinical laboratories and at the hospital could adversely affect the business. The success of the Company is dependent in part on the efforts of key members of its management team.

In addition, the success of the Company’s clinical laboratories also depends on employing and retaining qualified and experienced laboratory professionals, including specialists, who perform clinical laboratory testing services. In the future, if competition for the services of these professionals increases, the Company may not be able to continue to attract and retain individuals in its markets. The Company’s revenues and earnings could be adversely affected if a significant number of professionals terminate their relationship with the Company or become unable or unwilling to continue their employment.

Failure in the Company’s information technology systems could significantly increase testing turn-around time or billing processes and otherwise disrupt the Company’s operations or customer relationships.

The Company’s business and customer relationships depend, in part, on the continued performance of its information technology systems. Despite network security measures and other precautions, the Company’s information technology systems are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, computer viruses and similar disruptions. Sustained system failures or interruption of the Company’s systems in one or more of its operations could disrupt the Company’s ability to process laboratory requisitions, perform testing, provide test results in a timely manner and/or bill the appropriate party. Breaches with respect to protected health information could result in violations of HIPAA and analogous state laws, and risk the imposition of significant fines and penalties. Failure of the Company’s information technology systems could adversely affect the Company’s business, profitability and financial condition.

A significant deterioration in the economy could negatively impact testing volumes, cash collections and the availability of credit.

The Company’s operations are dependent upon ongoing demand for diagnostic testing and other services by patients, physicians, hospitals, MCOs, and others. A significant downturn in the economy could negatively impact the demand for diagnostic testing and other services as well as the ability of patients and other payers to pay for services ordered. In addition, uncertainty in the credit markets could reduce the availability of credit and impact the Company’s ability to meet its financing needs in the future.

Increasing health insurance premiums and co-payments or high deductible health plans may cause individuals to forgo health insurance and avoid medical attention, either of which may reduce demand for our products and services.

Health insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles have generally increased in recent years. These increases may cause individuals to forgo health insurance, as well as medical attention. This behavior may reduce demand for testing by our laboratories and for services at our hospital.

Our business has substantial indebtedness.

We currently have, and will likely continue to have, a substantial amount of indebtedness. Our indebtedness could, among other things, make it more difficult for us to satisfy our debt and other obligations, require us to use a large portion of our cash flow from operations to repay and service our debt or otherwise create liquidity problems, limit our flexibility to adjust to market conditions and place us at a competitive disadvantage. As of December 31, 2017, we had total debt outstanding, excluding the effects of derivative liabilities and unamortized discounts, of approximately $25.3 million, most of which is short term. In addition, our capital lease obligations were approximately $2.1 million at December 31, 2017, of which certain payments are past due.

Our ability to meet our obligations depends on our future performance and capital raising activities, which will be affected by financial, business, economic and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. If our cash flow and capital resources prove inadequate to allow us to pay the principal and interest on our debt, and meet our other obligations, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations, restructure or refinance our debt, which we may be unable to do on acceptable terms, and forego attractive business opportunities. In addition, the terms of our existing or future debt agreements may restrict us from pursuing any of these alternatives.

Failure to achieve and maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting may result in our not being able to accurately report our financial results. As a result, current and potential shareholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our stock.

Our management has determined that as of December 31, 2017, we did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting based on criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework as a result of material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. If the results of our remediation efforts regarding our material weaknesses are not successful, or if additional material weaknesses or significant deficiencies are identified in our internal control over financial reporting, our management will be unable to report favorably as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and/or our disclosure controls and procedures, and we could be required to further implement expensive and time-consuming remedial measures and potentially lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could have an adverse effect on our stock price and potentially subject us to litigation.

Hardware and software failures, delays in the operation of computer and communications systems, the failure to implement system enhancements or cyber security breaches may harm the Company.

The Company’s success depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of its computer and communications systems. A failure of the network or data gathering procedures could impede the processing of data, delivery of databases and services, client orders and day-to-day management of the business and could result in the corruption or loss of data. While certain operations have appropriate disaster recovery plans in place, we currently do not have sufficient redundant facilities to provide IT capacity in the event of a system failure. Despite any precautions the Company may take, damage from fire, floods, hurricanes, power loss, telecommunications failures, computer viruses, break-ins, cybersecurity breaches and similar events at our various computer facilities could result in interruptions in the flow of data to the servers and from the servers to clients.

In addition, any failure by the computer environment to provide required data communications capacity could result in interruptions in service. In the event of a delay in the delivery of data, the Company could be required to transfer data collection operations to an alternative provider of server hosting services. Such a transfer could result in delays in the ability to deliver products and services to clients. Additionally, significant delays in the planned delivery of system enhancements, improvements and inadequate performance of the systems once they are completed could damage the Company’s reputation and harm the business. Finally, long-term disruptions in the infrastructure caused by events such as natural disasters, the outbreak of war, the escalation of hostilities, acts of terrorism (particularly involving cities in which the Company has offices) and cybersecurity breaches could adversely affect the business. Although the Company carries property and business interruption insurance, the coverage may not be adequate to compensate for all losses that may occur.

Provisions of Delaware law and our organizational documents may discourage takeovers and business combinations that our stockholders may consider in their best interests, which could negatively affect our stock price.

Provisions of Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company or deterring tender offers for our common stock that other stockholders may consider in their best interests.

Our certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue up to 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more different series with terms to be fixed by our board of directors. Stockholder approval is not necessary to issue preferred stock in this manner. Issuance of these shares of preferred stock could have the effect of making it more difficult and more expensive for a person or group to acquire control of us, and could effectively be used as an anti-takeover device.

Our bylaws provide for an advance notice procedure for stockholders to nominate director candidates for election or to bring business before an annual meeting of stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors, and require that special meetings of stockholders be called only by our chairman of the board, chief executive officer, president or the board pursuant to a resolution adopted by a majority of the board.

The anti-takeover provisions of Delaware law and provisions in our organizational documents may prevent our stockholders from receiving the benefit from any premium to the market price of our common stock offered by a bidder in a takeover context. Even in the absence of a takeover attempt, the existence of these provisions may adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock if they are viewed as discouraging takeover attempts in the future.

As a public company, we incur significant administrative workload and expenses.

As a public company with common stock listed on the OTCQB, we must comply with various laws, regulations and requirements, including certain provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules implemented by the SEC. Complying with these statutes, regulations and requirements, including our public company reporting requirements, continues to occupy a significant amount of the time of our board of directors and management and involves significant accounting, legal and other expenses. We will need to hire additional accounting personnel to handle these responsibilities, which will increase our operating costs. Furthermore, these laws, regulations and requirements could make it more difficult or more costly for us to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, and we may be forced to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

New laws and regulations as well as changes to existing laws and regulations affecting public companies, including the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules adopted by the SEC, would likely result in increased costs to us as we respond to their requirements. We are investing resources to comply with evolving laws and regulations, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

We do not intend to pay cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock and certain of our financing agreements, while outstanding, prohibit us from declaring or paying cash dividends without approval which may not be granted. In addition, we anticipate that we will retain our earnings, if any, for future growth and therefore do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Accordingly, our stockholders will not realize a return on their investment unless the trading price of our common stock appreciates, which is uncertain and unpredictable.

We may use our stock to pay, to a large extent, for future acquisitions or for the repayment of debt, which would be dilutive to investors.

We may choose to use additional stock to pay, to a large extent, for future acquisitions, and believe that doing so will enable us to retain a greater percentage of our operating capital to pay for operations and marketing. Price and volume fluctuations in our stock might negatively impact our ability to effectively use our stock to pay for acquisitions, or could cause us to offer stock as consideration for acquisitions on terms that are not favorable to us and our stockholders. If we did resort to issuing stock in lieu of cash for acquisitions under unfavorable circumstances, it would result in increased dilution to investors.

Our common stock is subject to substantial dilution and we are requesting our stockholders’ approval to increase the number of authorized shares of our common stock and to approve a discretionary reverse split of our common stock.

The Company has outstanding options, warrants, convertible preferred stock and convertible debentures. Exercise of the options and warrants, and conversions of the convertible preferred stock and debentures could result in substantial dilution of our common stock and a decline in its market price. In addition, the terms of certain of the warrants, convertible preferred stock and convertible debentures issued by us provide for reductions in the per share exercise prices of the warrants and the per share conversion prices of the debentures and preferred stock (if applicable and subject to a floor in certain cases), in the event that we issue common stock or common stock equivalents (as that term is defined in the agreements) at an effective exercise/conversion price that is less than the then exercise/conversion prices of the outstanding warrants, preferred stock and debentures. These provisions, as well as the issuances of debentures and preferred stock with conversion prices that vary based upon the price of our common stock on the date of conversion, have resulted in significant dilution of our common stock and have given rise to reverse splits of our common stock.

The following table presents the dilutive effect of our various potential common shares as of April 1, 2018:

As of April 1, 2018, the Company lacked a sufficient number of authorized shares of common stock to cover all potentially dilutive common shares outstanding. On May 2, 2018, the Company intends to hold a special meeting of stockholders pursuant to a proxy statement filed with the SEC on March 14, 2018 to, among other things, obtain stockholder approve to increase the number of shares of its authorized common stock from 500,000,000 shares to 3,000,000,000 shares and to authorize its Board of Directors to approve an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, to effect a reverse stock split of all of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock at a specific ratio within a range from 1-for-50 to 1-for-300, and to grant authorization to its Board of Directors to determine, in its discretion, the specific ratio and timing of the reverse stock split any time before March 1, 2019, subject to the Board of Directors’ discretion to abandon such amendment.

If the Company does not secure approval from its stockholders to increase the authorized number of shares of common stock and to complete a reverse split of its common stock as is required to comply with the provisions of its outstanding agreements and to have sufficient authorized shares necessary to obtain additional capital to fund its operations, its business, and its ability to secure capital will be adversely affected, and it may not be able to continue as a going concern.

The success of our hospital depends upon its ability to maintain good relationships with physicians and, if the hospital is unable to successfully maintain good relationships with physicians, admissions and outpatient revenues may decrease and operating performance could decline.

Because physicians generally direct the majority of hospital admissions and outpatient services, a hospital’s success is, in part, dependent upon the number and quality of physicians on the medical staffs, the admissions and referrals practices of the physicians and the ability to maintain good relations with physicians. If the hospital is unable to successfully maintain good relationships with physicians, admissions may decrease and operating performance could decline.

The Big South Fork Medical Center is dependent on the local economy of Oneida, Tennessee and the surrounding area. A significant deterioration in the economy could cause a material adverse effect on the hospital’s business.

The hospital’s operations are dependent upon the local economy where it is located. A significant deterioration in that economy would negatively impact the demand for the hospital’s services, as well as the ability of patients and other payers to pay for service as rendered.

On January 31, 2018, the Company entered into an asset purchase agreement to acquire certain assets related to an acute care hospital located in Jamestown, Tennessee. This hospital is 38 miles from our existing hospital. Although the Company believes the synergies of management and services in a close geographic location will create numerous efficiencies for the Company, if the proposed asset purchase is consummated, it will expose the Company to a much greater degree to the effects of the economy in that one local area.

Not applicable.

The table below summarizes certain information as to our principal facilities as of April 1, 2018:

In addition, the table below summarizes certain information as to facilities used by our discontinued operations as of April 1, 2018:

We believe that each of our facilities as presently equipped has the production capacity for its currently foreseeable level of operations.

From time to time, the Company may be involved in a variety of claims, lawsuits, investigations and proceedings related to contractual disputes, employment matters, regulatory and compliance matters, intellectual property rights and other litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company operates in a highly regulated industry which may inherently lend itself to legal matters. Management is aware that litigation has associated costs and that results of adverse litigation verdicts could have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. Management, in consultation with legal counsel, has addressed known assertions and predicted unasserted claims below.

Biohealth Medical Laboratory, Inc, and PB Laboratories, LLC (the “Companies”) filed suit against CIGNA Health in 2015 alleging that CIGNA failed to pay claims for laboratory services the Companies provided to patients pursuant to CIGNA - issued and CIGNA - administered plans. In 2016, the U.S. District Court dismissed part of the Companies’ claims for lack of standing. The Companies appealed that decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which in late 2017 reversed the District Court’s decision and found that the Companies have standing to raise claims arising out of traditional insurance plans as well as self-funded plans.

The Company’s Epinex Diagnostics Laboratories, Inc. subsidiary was sued in a California state court by two former employees who alleged that they were wrongfully terminated, as well as for a variety of unpaid wage claims. The parties entered into a settlement agreement of this matter on July 29, 2016 for approximately $0.2 million, and the settlement was consummated on August 25, 2016. In October of 2016, the plaintiffs in this matter filed a motion with the court seeking payment for attorneys’ fees in the approximate amount of $0.7 million. On March 24, 2017, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for payment of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $0.3 million, and the Company has accrued this amount in its condensed consolidated financial statements. Additionally, the Company is seeking indemnification for these amounts from Epinex Diagnostics, Inc. (“EDI”), the seller of Epinex Diagnostic Laboratories, Inc. (“EDL”), pursuant to a Stock Purchase Agreement entered into by and among the parties.

In February 2016, the Company received notice that the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) placed a lien against Medytox Solutions, Inc. and its subsidiaries relating to unpaid 2014 taxes due, plus penalties and interest, in the amount of $5.0 million. The Company paid $0.1 million toward its 2014 tax liability on March 2016. The Company filed its 2015 Federal tax return on March 15, 2016 and the accompanying election to carryback the reported net operating losses was filed in April 2016. On August 24, 2016, the lien was released, and on September of 2016 the Company received a refund from the IRS in the amount of $1.9 million. In November of 2016, the IRS commenced an audit of the Company’s 2015 Federal tax return. The Company is currently unable to predict the outcome of the audit or any liability to the Company that may result from the audit.

On September 27, 2016, a tax warrant was issued against the Company by the Florida Department of Revenue (the “DOR”) for unpaid 2014 state income taxes in the approximate amount of $0.9 million, including penalties and interest. On January 25, 2017, the Company paid the DOR $250,000 as partial payment on this liability, and in February 2017 the Company entered into a Stipulation Agreement with the DOR which allows the Company to make monthly installment payments of $35,000 until February 2018 and negotiate a new payment agreement then, if the balance of $0.3 million cannot be satisfied in a lump sum. If at any time during the Stipulation period the Company fails to timely file any required tax returns with the DOR or does not meet the payment obligations under the Stipulation Agreement, the entire amount due will be accelerated. $0.5 million remains outstanding to the DOR at December 31, 2017.

In December of 2016, TCS-Florida, L.P. (“Tetra”), filed suit against the Company for failure to make the required payments under an equipment leasing contract that the Company had with Tetra (see Note 11). On January 3, 2017, Tetra received a Default Judgment against the Company in the amount of $2.6 million, representing the balance owed on the leases, as well as additional interest, penalties and fees. The Company has recognized this amount in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2016. In January and February of 2017, the Company made payments to Tetra in connection with this judgment aggregating to $0.7 million, and on February 15, 2017, the Company entered into a forbearance agreement with Tetra whereby the remaining $1.9 million due will be paid in 24 equal monthly installments. Payments commenced on May 1, 2017. $1.3 million monthly payments remain outstanding to Tetra at December 31, 2017. The Company and Tetra have agreed to dispose of certain equipment and reduce the balance owed by amounts received.

In December of 2016, DeLage Landen Financial Services, Inc. (“DeLage”), filed suit against the Company for failure to make the required payments under an equipment leasing contract that the Company had with DeLage (see Note 8). On January 24, 2017, DeLage received a default judgment against the Company in the approximate amount of $1.0 million, representing the balance owed on the lease, as well as additional interest, penalties and fees. The Company has recognized this amount in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2016. On February 8, 2017, a Stay of Execution was filed and under its terms the balance due will be paid in variable monthly installments through January of 2019, with an implicit interest rate of 4.97%. The Company is in default of its payments to DeLage.

On December 7, 2016, the holders of the Tegal Notes (see Note 7) filed suit against the Company seeking payment for the amounts due under the notes in the aggregate of $0.4 million, including accrued interest. A request for entry of default judgment was filed on January 24, 2017. These amounts remain outstanding at December 31, 2017.

In November 2017 a former shareholder of Genomas filed suit against the Company for payment of a Note payable by the subsidiary Genomas. This Note is recorded in the financial statements of the subsidiary and is not payable directly from the Company. Other claims were included in the suit which the Company believes to be frivolous and without merit. The Company has filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims. The Company does not deem this suit to be material.

The Company and subsidiaries have been party to suits filed by landlords for late payment of rent and have either settled these claims or are in process of agreeing to settlement. The Company does not deem these actions to be material.

Not applicable.

PART II

Since October 25, 2017, our common stock has been traded on the OTCQB under the symbol “RNVA”. From November 3, 2015 to October 24, 2017, our common stock was listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “RNVA”. Prior to that date our common stock was listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “CLRX”. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the OTCQB or The NASDAQ Capital Market, as the case may be, for the periods indicated, as adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Splits. Such quotations represent inter-dealer prices without retail markup, markdown or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions:

Holders

As of April 1, 2018, there were 123 holders of record of the Company’s common stock which excludes stockholders whose shares are held in nominee or street name by brokers.

Dividend Distributions

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock, nor do we anticipate any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Certain of our financing agreements prohibit the payment of cash dividends. The holders of our preferred stock receive dividends at the same time any dividend is paid on shares of common stock in an amount equal to the amount such holder would have received if such shares of preferred stock were converted into common stock.

The Company intends to retain earnings, if any, to finance the development and expansion of its business. Future dividend policy will be subject to the discretion of the Board of Directors and will be contingent upon future earnings, if any, the Company’s financial condition, capital requirements, general business conditions, restrictions under the Company’s financing agreements and other factors. Therefore, there can be no assurance that any dividends of any kind will ever be paid on the Company’s common stock.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

On September 25, 2013, the Company’s board of directors approved and adopted the Medytox Solutions, Inc. 2013 Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan was approved by the holders of a majority of the Company’s voting stock on November 22, 2013. The Plan provided for the grant of shares of common stock, options, performance shares, performance units, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights and other awards. Options to purchase shares of common stock and restricted shares of common stock were granted to the Company’s employees and consultants under the Plan. As a result of the Merger, this Plan was cancelled. Any grants issued prior to the cancellation remain in force, as adjusted pursuant to the terms of the Merger.

2007 Incentive Award Plan

The Company’s 2007 Equity Participation Plan (“2007 Equity Plan”), as amended, which became available upon the completion of the Merger, authorized an aggregate of 50 million shares of common stock to be available for grant pursuant to the 2007 Equity Plan. The 2007 Equity Plan provided for the grant of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights, performance shares, performance stock units, dividend equivalents, stock payments, deferred stock, restricted stock units, other stock-based awards, and performance-based awards. The option exercise price of all stock options granted pursuant to the 2007 Equity Plan was not less than 100% of the fair market value of the common stock on the date of grant. Stock options may be exercised as determined by the Board, but in no event after the tenth anniversary of the date of grant, provided that a vested nonqualified stock option may be exercised up to 12 months after the optionee’s death. Awards granted under the 2007 Equity Plan were generally subject to vesting at the discretion of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The 2007 Equity Plan terminated pursuant to its terms in September 2017. Grants made prior to the date of termination will remain outstanding until exercised, forfeited or expired pursuant to the terms of each grant.

The following table provides information regarding the status of our existing equity compensation plans at December 31, 2017:

n/a - not applicable.

(1) See Note 13 of the consolidated financial statements for additional information about weighted average exercise prices.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

None.

Not applicable.

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read together with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Such statements consist of any statement other than a recitation of historical fact and can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend” or “estimate” or the negative thereof or other variations thereof or comparable terminology. The reader is cautioned that all forward-looking statements are speculative, and there are certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events or results to differ from those referred to in such forward-looking statements (see Item 1A, “Risk Factors”).

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Medytox Solutions, Inc. (“Medytox”) was organized on July 20, 2005 under the laws of the State of Nevada. In the first half of 2011, Medytox’s management elected to reorganize as a holding company, and Medytox established and acquired a number of companies in the medical service and software sector between 2011 and 2014.

On November 2, 2015, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 15, 2015, by and among CollabRx, Inc. (“CollabRx”), CollabRx Merger Sub, Inc. (“Merger Sub”), a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx formed for the purpose of the merger, and Medytox, Merger Sub merged with and into Medytox, with Medytox as the surviving company and a direct, wholly-owned subsidiary of CollabRx (the “Merger”). Prior to closing, the Company amended its certificate of incorporation to effect a 1-for-10 reverse stock split and to change its name to Rennova Health, Inc. In connection with the Merger, (i) each share of common stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive 0.4096 shares of common stock of the Company, (ii) each share of Series B Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series B Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company, and (iii) each share of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of Medytox was converted into the right to receive one share of a newly-authorized Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of the Company. This transaction was accounted for as a reverse merger in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) and, as such, the historical financial statements of Medytox became the historical financial statements of the Company.

Holders of Company equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Company common stock and all restricted stock units, options and warrants exercisable for shares of Company common stock) held 10% of the Company’s common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, and holders of Medytox equity prior to the closing of the Merger (including all outstanding Medytox common stock and all outstanding options exercisable for shares of Medytox common stock, but less certain options that were cancelled upon the closing pursuant to agreements between Medytox and such optionees) held 90% of the Company’s common stock immediately following the closing of the Merger, in each case on a fully diluted basis, provided, however, outstanding shares of Series B Convertible Preferred Stock and Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, certain outstanding convertible promissory notes exercisable for Company common stock after the closing and certain option grants expected to be made following the closing of the Merger were excluded from such ownership percentages.

Rennova Health is a healthcare enterprise that delivers products and services to healthcare providers, their patients and individuals. We operate in two synergistic divisions: 1) Clinical diagnostics through our clinical laboratories; and 2) Hospital operations through our Big South Fork Medical Center located in Oneida Tennessee, which began operations on August 8, 2017. In addition, we recently entered into an asset purchase agreement to acquire the assets of an acute care hospital located in Jamestown Tennessee, which we expect to close on in the second quarter of 2018. We aspire to create a more sustainable relationship with our customers by offering needed and interoperable solutions to capture multiple revenue streams from medical providers.

Our Services

We are a healthcare enterprise that delivers products and services to healthcare providers, their patients and individuals. We operate in two synergistic divisions: 1) Clinical diagnostics services through our clinical laboratories; and 2) Hospital operations. During 2017, we decided to spin off two of our business divisions as more fully discussed below under the heading “Discontinued Operations.”

Our principal line of business over the past few years has been clinical laboratory blood and urine testing services, with a particular emphasis on the provision of urine drug toxicology testing to physicians, clinics and rehabilitation facilities in the United States. Testing services to rehabilitation facilities represented approximately 51% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 100% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2016. Our Hospital Operations, which began on August 8, 2017, as more fully discussed below, represented approximately 40% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2017.

On January 13, 2017, we closed on an asset purchase agreement to acquire certain assets related to Scott County Community Hospital, based in Oneida, Tennessee (the “Hospital Assets”). The Hospital Assets include a 52,000-square foot hospital building and 6,300 square foot professional building on approximately 4.3 acres. Scott County Community Hospital is classified as a Critical Access Hospital (rural) with 25 beds, a 24/7 emergency department, operating rooms and a laboratory that provides a range of diagnostic services. Scott County Community Hospital closed in July 2016 in connection with the bankruptcy filing of its parent company, Pioneer Health Services, Inc. We acquired the Hospital Assets out of bankruptcy for a purchase price of $1.0 million. The hospital, which has since been renamed Big South Fork Medical Center, became operational on August 8, 2017. Going forward, we expect the hospital will provide us with a stable revenue base, as well as the potential for significant synergistic opportunities with our Clinical Laboratory Operations business segment.

In addition, on January 31, 2018, the Company entered into an asset purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) to acquire certain assets related to an acute care hospital located in Jamestown, Tennessee. The hospital is known as Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown and its associated assets, including a separately located doctor’s practice, are being acquired from Community Health Systems, Inc. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018, subject to customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions. The purchase price is equal to the Net Working Capital (as defined in the Purchase Agreement), plus $1.00.

Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is a fully-operational 85-bed facility including a 24/7 emergency department, radiology department, surgical center, and a wound care and hyperbaric center. The purchase includes a 90,000-square foot hospital building on approximately eight acres. Tennova Healthcare – Jamestown is located 38 miles from the Company’s existing hospital, the Big South Fork Medical Center, which is located in Oneida Tennessee.

Discontinued Operations

On July 12, 2017, the Company announced plans to spin off its Advanced Molecular Services Group (“AMSG”) and in the third quarter 2017 the Company’s Board of Directors voted unanimously to spin off the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Health Technology Solutions, Inc. (“HTS”), as independent publicly traded companies by way of tax-free distributions to the Company’s stockholders. Completion of these spinoffs is expected to occur in the third quarter of 2018. The Board of Directors is currently considering if AMSG and HTS would be better as one combined spinoff instead of two. The spinoffs are subject to numerous conditions, including effectiveness of Registration Statements on Form 10 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and consents, including under various funding agreements previously entered into by the Company. A record date to determine those stockholders entitled to receive shares in the spinoffs should be approximately 30 to 60 days prior to the dates of the spinoffs. The strategic goal of the spinoffs is to create three (or two) public companies, each of which can focus on its own strengths and operational plans. In addition, after the spinoffs, each company will provide a distinct and targeted investment opportunity.

The Company has reflected the amounts relating to AMSG and HTS as disposal groups classified as held for sale and included in discontinued operations in the Company’s accompanying consolidated financial statements. Prior to being classified as held for sale, AMSG had been included in the Decision Support and Informatics division, except for the Company’s subsidiary, Alethea Laboratories, Inc., which had been included in the Clinical Laboratories division and HTS had been included in the Company’s Supportive Software Solutions division. The segment disclosures included in our results of operations presented below no longer include amounts relating to AMSG and HTS following the reclassification to discontinued operations.

Outlook

While our Clinical Laboratory Operations continue to account for a substantial portion of our consolidated revenues, these revenues have decreased significantly over the past one to two years. This decline in revenues has had a material adverse impact on our liquidity, results of operations and financial condition, and is the result of lower third-party reimbursement and while we secured numerous in-network contracts with payers our status in many cases is as an “out of network” service provider. These trends have impacted our entire industry, and have been accompanied by allegations of irregularities in the practices of a number our competitors and substance abuse facilities. In response, we have put in place a robust compliance program that we are implementing in all facets of our business.

We believe that our ability to grow our clinical laboratory revenues and return to the profitability is dependent on our ability to secure additional “in-network” contracts with insurance companies and other third-party payers which will then ensure adequate and timely payment for the toxicology, clinical pharmacogenetics and other testing services we perform. These third-party payers are now generally unwilling to reimburse service providers who are not part of their network, a departure from prior industry practices and a trend that has accelerated during the two years. While we have made some progress in securing “in network” contracts with payers during the past two years, it has not been reflected in our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016. However, we do anticipate that significant new opportunities to become credentialed with certain large third-party payers will arise in fiscal 2018, which would have a significant positive impact on our future revenues. In addition, we have made a number of changes to our onboarding policies and procedures to ensure that, on a going forward basis, substantially all services that we performed will be reimbursable.

We believe that the addition of Rural hospitals to our business model offers a more predictable and contracted stable revenue base, as well as the potential for significant synergistic opportunities with our Clinical Laboratory Operations business segment. Rural hospitals provide a much-needed service to their local community and reduce our reliance on commission based sales employees to generate sales. We currently operate one hospital and the acquisition of the recently announced second, larger hospital in the same geographic location should create numerous efficiencies in purchasing, staffing and provision of needed services to the local community. We are confident that this is a sustainable model we can continue to grow through acquisition and development and believe that we can benefit from the compliance and IT and software capabilities we already have in place. We believe that a successful spin off the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Advanced Molecular Services Group, Inc. and Health Technology Solutions, Inc. as one or two independent publicly traded companies by way of tax-free distributions to the Company’s stockholders would allow each to focus on its own strengths and operational plans. In addition, after the spinoffs, each company will provide a distinct and targeted investment opportunity. The Company believes it will be able to recognize the expenditures to date, which are in excess of $20 million, as an investment after the spinoff(s) are complete.

We have received approximately $15.7 million in cash from the issuances of debentures and warrants during 2017 (see Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements), $4.3 million from related parties (see Notes 7 and 8 to the consolidated financial statements) and an additional $4.0 million of proceeds on October 30, 2017 from the issuance of our convertible preferred stock (see Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements). Subsequent to December 31, 2017, we received $2 million from the issuance of debentures and $0.8 million from the sale of stock we owned (see Note 20).

The protective covenants in the various agreements combined with the Company’s current inability to issue new shares and nonpayment of certain liabilities means that $12.4 million that might otherwise be treated as equity have been treated as derivative liabilities and had the relative effect applied to the Company’s financial statements including the profit and loss and balance sheet.

Our net loss from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $50.9 million, as compared to $22.6 million for the same period of a year ago. The change is primarily due to the decrease in operating expenses of $5.1 million and the increase in revenue of $1.3 million offset by $12.4 million additional expense related to the value of derivative liabilities referred to above, an increase of $15.2 million in interest expense, the decrease of $5.3 million in other income (expense), and additional income tax expense of $1.8 million.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations are based on our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make a number of estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. Such estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. We base our estimates on historical experiences and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. We continue to monitor significant estimates made during the preparation of our financial statements. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate estimates and assumptions based upon historical experience and various other factors and circumstances. We believe our estimates and assumptions are reasonable in the circumstances; however, actual results may differ from these estimates under different future conditions.

We have identified the policies and significant estimation processes discussed below as critical to our business and to the understanding of our results of operations. For a detailed application of these and other accounting policies, see Note 2 to the accompanying audited consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017.

Revenue Recognition

Service revenues are generated from laboratory testing services and hospital revenues.

Laboratory testing services include chemical diagnostic tests such as blood analysis and urine analysis. Laboratory service revenues are recognized at the time the testing services are performed and billed and are reported at their estimated net realizable amounts. Net service revenues are determined utilizing gross service revenues net of contractual adjustments and discounts. Even though it is the responsibility of the patient to pay for laboratory service bills, most individuals in the U.S. have an agreement with a third-party payer such as a commercial insurance provider, Medicaid or Medicare to pay all or a portion of their healthcare expenses; the majority of services provided by us are to patients covered under a third-party payer contract. In most cases, the Company is provided the third-party billing information and seeks payment from the third party in accordance with the terms and conditions of the third party payer for health service providers like us. Each of these third-party payers may differ not only in terms of rates, but also with respect to terms and conditions of payment and providing coverage (reimbursement) for specific tests. Estimated revenues are established based on a series of procedures and judgments that require industry specific healthcare experience and an understanding of payer methods and trends. Despite follow up billing efforts, the Company does not currently anticipate collection of a significant portion of self-pay billings, including the patient responsibility portion of the billing for patients covered by third party payers. The Company currently does not have any capitated agreements.

For hospital goods and or services, net revenues are determined utilizing gross revenues net of contractual adjustments and discounts and are recognized when the goods and services are delivered. Even though it is the responsibility of the patient to pay for goods and services rendered, most individuals have an agreement with a third-party payer such as a commercial insurance provider, Medicaid or Medicare to pay all or a portion of their healthcare expenses.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” The standard, including subsequently issued amendments, will replace most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP when it becomes effective. There is a five-step approach outlined in the standard. Entities are permitted to apply the new standard under the full retrospective method, subject to certain practical expedients, or the modified retrospective method that requires the application of the guidance only to contracts that are uncompleted on the date of initial application.

In determining revenue, we first identify the contract according to the scope of ASC 606 with the following criteria:

The hospital ensures that it is probable and will collect substantially all of the consideration to which it is entitled. The hospital has established the transaction price for providing goods or services to a patient through historical cash collection and current data from each identified payer class. This may include the effects of variable consideration such as discounts and price concessions and may be less than the stated contract price. With variable consideration, whether applied on a contract-by-contract basis or by using a portfolio approach. The ultimate transaction price reflects explicit price concessions. The hospital has an obligation to provide medically necessary or emergency services regardless of a patient’s intent or ability to pay. In determining collectability, the evaluation is based on experience or the contract portfolio approach with either a specific patient or a class of similar patients.

The hospital practices the full retrospective approach of all the reporting periods presented under the new standard discloses any adjustment to prior-period information.

This includes but is not limited to Disaggregated revenue information, Contract asset and liability information, including significant changes from prior year, and Judgements, and changes in judgement, that significantly affect the determination of the amount of revenue and timing.

We review our calculations for the realizability of gross service revenues on a monthly basis in order to make certain that we are properly allowing for the uncollectable portion of our gross billings and that our estimates remain sensitive to variances and changes within our payer groups. The contractual allowance calculation is made on the basis of historical allowance rates for the various specific payer groups on a monthly basis with a greater weight being given to the most recent trends; this process is adjusted based on recent changes in underlying contract provisions. This calculation is routinely analyzed by us on the basis of actual allowances issued by payers and the actual payments made to determine what adjustments, if any, are needed.

Contractual Allowances and Doubtful Accounts Policy

Accounts receivable are reported at realizable value, net of allowances for credits and doubtful accounts, which are estimated and recorded in the period the related revenue is recorded. The Company has a standardized approach to estimating and reviewing the collectability of its receivables based on a number of factors, including the period they have been outstanding. Historical collection and payer reimbursement experience is an integral part of the estimation process related to allowances for contractual credits and doubtful accounts. In addition, the Company regularly assesses the state of its billing operations in order to identify issues which may impact the collectability of these receivables or reserve estimates. Receivables deemed to be uncollectible are charged against the allowance for doubtful accounts at the time such receivables are written-off. Recoveries of receivables previously written-off are recorded as credits to the allowance for doubtful accounts. Revisions to the allowances for doubtful accounts estimates are recorded as an adjustment to provision for bad debts.

Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets

The Company accounts for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets according to the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 360, Property, Plant and Equipment (“ASC 360”). ASC 360 clarifies the accounting for the impairment of long-lived assets and for long-lived assets to be disposed of, including the disposal of business segments and major lines of business. Long-lived assets are reviewed when facts and circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the asset may not be recoverable. When necessary, impaired assets are written down to estimated fair value based on the best information available. Estimated fair value is generally based on either appraised value or measured by discounting estimated future cash flows. Considerable management judgment is necessary to estimate discounted future cash flows. Accordingly, actual results could vary significantly from such estimates.

At December 31, 2016, we determined that a portion of our laboratory service equipment was impaired and we recorded an impairment charge of $0.8 million, and we also recorded an impairment charge for our equity investment in Genomas, Inc. (“Genomas”) in the amount of $0.2 million. At December 31, 2017, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $1.0 million related to Genomas acquisition. Genomas is part of AMSG and is included in our discontinued operations.

Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value

We account for warrants issued in conjunction with the issuance of common stock and certain convertible debt instruments in accordance with the guidance contained in ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”) and ASC Topic 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (“ASC 480”). For warrant instruments and conversion options embedded in promissory notes that are not deemed to be indexed to the Company’s own stock, we classified such instruments as liabilities at their fair values at the time of issuance and adjusted the instruments to fair value at each reporting period. These liabilities were subject to re-measurement at each balance sheet date until extinguished either through conversion or exercise, and any change in fair value was recognized in our statement of operations. The fair values of these derivative and other financial instruments had been estimated using a Black-Scholes model and other valuation techniques.

In July 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-11 “Earnings Per Share (Topic 260) Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480) Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815).” The amendments in Part I of this Update change the classification analysis of certain equity-linked financial instruments (or embedded features) with down round features. When determining whether certain financial instruments should be classified as liabilities or equity instruments, a down round feature no longer precludes equity classification when assessing whether the instrument is indexed to an entity’s own stock. The amendments also clarify existing disclosure requirements for equity-classified instruments. As a result, a freestanding equity-linked financial instrument (or embedded conversion option) no longer would be accounted for as a derivative liability at fair value as a result of the existence of a down round feature. For freestanding equity classified financial instruments, the amendments require entities that present earnings per share (EPS) in accordance with Topic 260 to recognize the effect of the down round feature when it is triggered. That effect is treated as a dividend and as a reduction of income available to common shareholders in basic EPS. Convertible instruments with embedded conversion options that have down round features are now subject to the specialized guidance for contingent beneficial conversion features (in Subtopic 470-20, Debt—Debt with Conversion and Other Options), including related EPS guidance (in Topic 260). The amendments in Part II of this Update recharacterize the indefinite deferral of certain provisions of Topic 480 that now are presented as pending content in the Codification, to a scope exception. Those amendments do not have an accounting effect.

Under current GAAP, an equity-linked financial instrument with a down round feature that otherwise is not required to be classified as a liability under the guidance in Topic 480 is evaluated under the guidance in Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, to determine whether it meets the definition of a derivative. If it meets that definition, the instrument (or embedded feature) is evaluated to determine whether it is indexed to an entity’s own stock as part of the analysis of whether it qualifies for a scope exception from derivative accounting. Generally, for warrants and conversion options embedded in financial instruments that are deemed to have a debt host (assuming the underlying shares are readily convertible to cash or the contract provides for net settlement such that the embedded conversion option meets the definition of a derivative), the existence of a down round feature results in an instrument not being considered indexed to an entity’s own stock. This results in a reporting entity being required to classify the freestanding financial instrument or the bifurcated conversion option as a liability, which the entity must measure at fair value initially and at each subsequent reporting date.

The amendments in this Update revise the guidance for instruments with down round features in Subtopic 815-40, Derivatives and Hedging—Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity, which is considered in determining whether an equity-linked financial instrument qualifies for a scope exception from derivative accounting. An entity still is required to determine whether instruments would be classified in equity under the guidance in Subtopic 815-40 in determining whether they qualify for that scope exception. If they do qualify, freestanding instruments with down round features are no longer classified as liabilities and embedded conversion options with down round features are no longer bifurcated.

For entities that present EPS in accordance with Topic 260, and when the down round feature is included in an equity-classified freestanding financial instrument, the value of the effect of the down round feature is treated as a dividend when it is triggered and as a numerator adjustment in the basic EPS calculation. This reflects the occurrence of an economic transfer of value to the holder of the instrument, while alleviating the complexity and income statement volatility associated with fair value measurement on an ongoing basis. Convertible instruments are unaffected by the Topic 260 amendments in this Update.

Those amendments in Part 1 of this Update are a cost savings relative to current GAAP. This is because, assuming the required criteria for equity classification in Subtopic 815-40 are met, an entity that issued such an instrument no longer measures the instrument at fair value at each reporting period (in the case of warrants) or separately accounts for a bifurcated derivative (in the case of convertible instruments) on the basis of the existence of a down round feature. For convertible instruments with embedded conversion options that have down round features, applying specialized guidance such as the model for contingent beneficial conversion features rather than bifurcating an embedded derivative also reduces cost and complexity. Under that specialized guidance, the issuer recognizes the intrinsic value of the feature only when the feature becomes beneficial instead of bifurcating the conversion option and measuring it at fair value each reporting period.

The amendments in Part II of this Update replace the indefinite deferral of certain guidance in Topic 480 with a scope exception. This has the benefit of improving the readability of the Codification and reducing the complexity associated with navigating the guidance in Topic 480.

For public business entities, the amendments in Part I of this Update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. For all other entities, the amendments in Part I of this Update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. Early adoption is permitted for all entities, including adoption in an interim period. If an entity early adopts the amendments in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. The amendments in Part 1 of this Update should be applied in either of the following ways: 1. Retrospectively to outstanding financial instruments with a down round feature by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the statement of financial position as of the beginning of the first fiscal year and interim period(s) in which the pending content that links to this paragraph is effective; or 2. Retrospectively to outstanding financial instruments with a down round feature for each prior reporting period presented in accordance with the guidance on accounting changes in paragraphs 250-10-45-5 through 45-10.

The amendments in Part II of this Update do not require any transition guidance because those amendments do not have an accounting effect.

We have determined that this amendment had a material impact on our consolidated financial statements and we have early adopted this accounting standard update. The cumulative effect of the adoption of ASU 2017-11 resulted in the reclassification of the derivative liability recorded of $56 million and the reversal of $41 million of interest expense recorded in our first fiscal quarter of 2017. The remaining $16 million was offset to additional paid in capital (discount on convertible debenture). Additionally, we recognized a deemed dividend from the trigger of the down round provision feature of $53.3 million. A $51 million deemed dividend was recorded retrospectively as of the beginning of the issuance of the debentures issued in March 2017 where the initial derivative liability was recorded as a result of the down round provision feature.

In accordance with ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” the Company applies fair value accounting for all financial assets and liabilities and non-financial assets and liabilities that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities which are required to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and the market-based risk measurements or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, such as risks inherent in valuation techniques, transfer restrictions and credit risk. Fair value is estimated by applying the following hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value into three levels and bases the categorization within the hierarchy upon the lowest level of input that is available and significant to the fair value measurement:

Stock Based Compensation

We account for Stock-Based Compensation under ASC 718 “Compensation – Stock Compensation”, which addresses the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services, with a primary focus on transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. ASC 718 requires measurement of the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award. Incremental compensation costs arising from subsequent modifications of awards after the grant date must be recognized.

The Company accounts for stock-based compensation awards to non-employees in accordance with ASC 505-50, Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees. Under ASC 505-50, the Company determines the fair value of the options, warrants or stock-based compensation awards granted as either the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. Any stock options or warrants issued to non-employees are recorded in expense and additional paid-in capital in stockholders’ equity/(deficit) over the applicable service periods using variable accounting through the vesting dates based on the fair value of the options or warrants at the end of each period.

Year ended December 31, 2017 compared to year ended December 31, 2016

The following table summarizes the results of our consolidated continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Net Revenues

Consolidated net revenues were $4.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to $3.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, an increase of $1.3 million, or 39%. The increase is mainly due to the $1.8 million of net revenue in 2017 from our Big South Fork Medical Center, which began operating on August 8, 2017, partially offset by the $0.5 decline in Clinical Laboratory Operations revenue resulting from a decrease of 79.6% in insured test volume in 2017 as compared to 2016, as a number of large third party payers are now generally unwilling to reimburse service providers who are not part of their network, a departure from prior industry practices. Our focus on the provision of diagnostic services to the substance abuse sector was a factor in this reduction of revenue. The third party payers have dramatically changed the way they reimburse for this sector. The Company has made progress in expanding into a wider and more varied market place, including hospital operations, and that combined with aggressive consolidation and cost cutting is expected to reduce the losses incurred in the future.

Direct Cost of Revenue

Direct costs of revenue from continuing operations decreased by 24%, from $1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2017. The decrease of $0.3 million is a result of a decrease in reagents and supplies at our laboratories, partially offset by an increase of $0.1 million related to our Hospital Operations. The decrease is a result of the 16.7% decline in total samples processed and the transition of a significant portion of our testing from external reference laboratories to internal processing.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses decreased by $1.6 million, or 9%, for the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the same period of a year ago. The decrease is mainly the result of a $3.3 million reduction in employee compensation and related costs, net of Hospital Operations employee compensation of $2.2 million, as we significantly reduced our headcount throughout the latter half of 2016 and 2017 in response to the decline in revenues in our Clinical Laboratory Operations, a $0.6 million decrease in consulting fees, offset by $1.0 million of physician fees related to the Hospital Operations, $1.0 million loan extension fee and $0.8 million decrease in stock compensation expense. In 2016, the Company also incurred $0.8 million related to the financial support of Epinex Diagnostics, Inc. and $0.4 million related to Genomas.

Sales and Marketing Expenses

The decrease in sales and marketing expenses of $1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2016 was primarily due to a reduction in sales employee and contractor compensation expenses in the amount of $1.0 million, as well as reduced travel, advertising and commissionable collections related to the decline in net revenues.

Bad Debt Expense

Bad debt expense for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $1.5 million, as compared to $2.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The decrease in 2017 is mainly due to the $3.5 million bad debt charge related to receivables in our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment.

Impairment Charges

During the year ended December 31, 2016, we recognized an impairment charge of $0.8 million with respect to some of our idle laboratory equipment, which was primarily due to the decrease in sample volume at our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment, and we also recorded an impairment related to our equity investment in Genomas, Inc. in the amount of $0.2 million. In December 31, 2017, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $1.0 million related to the Genomas acquisition, reflected in discontinued operations.

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses

Depreciation and amortization expense decreased by $0.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2017, as compared with the year ended December 31, 2016, as some of our property and equipment became fully depreciated during 2016 and our capital expenditures have been minimal due to the reduced sample volume at our laboratories.

Loss from Operations

Our operating loss decreased to $16.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2017 compared to $22.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. The decrease is mainly due to decrease in bad debt charge of $0.5 million, a decrease in impairment charges in the amount of $1.0 million, a decrease in general and administrative expenses of $1.6 million, a decrease in sales and marketing expenses in the amount of $1.0 million, a decrease in direct costs of revenue in the amount of $0.3 million, and a decrease in depreciation expenses of $0.7 million, partially offset by the $1.3 million increase in net revenues for the year.

Other (Expense) Income, net

Other expense, net, of $33.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2017 consists primarily of $8.8 million of non-cash interest charge and $12.4 million value of derivative liabilities related to convertible debentures and warrants that were issued during the period, $10.4 million for amortization of debt discount, $2.4 million for interest expense related to notes payable and capital lease obligations. Other expense, net also includes a $43 million gain on the extinguishment of debt, fully offset by a loss of $43 million due to the change in fair value of debt as a result of the adoption of ASU 2017-11, which is more fully discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. Other expense, net of $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 primarily consists of $5.4 million in non-cash gains on the change in fair value of derivative financial instruments related to convertible notes and warrants, which was more than offset by $6.3 million of interest expense. Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2016 includes interest charges of $1.3 million related to a $5.0 million prepaid forward purchase contract, $0.8 million related to capital lease obligations and $3.0 million of non-cash interest expense related to the accretion of debt discounts.

Net loss from Continuing Operations

Our net loss from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $50.9 million, as compared to $22.6 million for the same period of a year ago. The change is primarily due to the decrease in operating expenses of $5.1 million and the increase in revenue of $1.3 million offset by $12.4 million additional expense related to the value of derivative liabilities referred to above, an increase of $15.2 million in interest expense, the decrease of $5.3 million in other income (expense), and additional income tax expense of $1.8 million.

The following table presents key financial and operating metrics for our Clinical Laboratory Operations segment:

The reduction in insured tests performed in 2017 negatively impacted our revenues by $2.7 million, while the increase in net revenue per insured test positively impacted our revenues by $2.1 million. The increase in direct costs per sample resulted in a $0.8 million increase in direct costs of revenue, while the decrease in the number of samples processed resulted in a $0.5 million reduction in direct costs of revenue.

The decrease in general and administrative expenses is primarily due to the reduction in employee compensation and related costs, as we significantly reduced our headcount.

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Hospital Operations segment:

Our hospital operations began on August 8, 2017.

¹ During our start up period the separation of direct costs per patient and general and administrative expenses has not been completed. As this exercise is completed we expect to reduce the general and administration costs and increase our direct costs of revenue per patient. 

The following table presents key financial metrics for our Corporate group:

The decrease in general and administrative expenses is mainly the result of a $3.0 million reduction in employee compensation and related costs, net of Hospital employee compensation of $1.6 million, as we significantly reduced our headcount throughout the latter half of 2016 and 2017 in response to the decline in revenues in our Clinical and Supportive Software, and a $0.2 million reduction in maintenance costs for our laboratory equipment and a $0.8 million decrease in stock compensation expense.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2017, we have financed our operations primarily from the sale of our equity securities, the issuance of debentures, short-term advances from related parties, and the proceeds we received from pledging certain of our accounts receivable as discussed below. Future cash needs for working capital, capital expenditures and potential acquisitions will require management to seek additional equity or obtain additional credit facilities. The sale of additional equity will result in additional dilution to our stockholders. A portion of our cash may be used to acquire or invest in complementary businesses or products or to obtain the right to use complementary technologies. From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, we evaluate potential acquisitions of such businesses, products or technologies.

At December 31, 2017, we had no cash on hand from continuing operations, a working capital deficit of $21.5 million and a stockholders’ deficit of $40.6 million. In addition, we incurred a loss from continuing operations of $50.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2017. As of the date of this report, our cash position is critically deficient and payments critical to our ability to operate are not being made in the ordinary course. Our fixed operating expenses, including payroll, rent, capital lease payments and other fixed expenses, including the costs required to operate Big South Fork Medical Center, which began operations on August 8, 2017, are approximately $1.5-$2.0 million per month.

During 2017, we raised approximately $19.7 million from the sale of equity securities and debentures, including $4.0 million that we raised on October 30, 2017 from the issuance of our Series I-1 Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series I-1 Preferred Stock”) as more fully discussed below. However, our failure to raise additional capital in the coming months will have a material adverse effect on our ability to operate our business. In addition, we will be required to raise additional capital in order to fund our operations for the next twelve months. There can be no assurances that we will be able to raise the necessary capital on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If we are unable to secure the necessary funding as and when required, it will have a material adverse effect on our business and we may be required to downsize, further reduce our workforce, sell some of our assets or possibly curtail or even cease operations, raising substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

In July 2017, we announced that we plan to spin off AMSG and in the third quarter of 2017, our Board of Directors voted unanimously to spin off our HTS, as independent publicly traded companies by way of tax-free distributions to our shareholders. Completion of these spinoffs is expected to occur in the third quarter of 2018. Our Board of Directors is currently considering if AMSG and HTS would be better off as one combined spinoff instead of two. The spinoffs are subject to numerous conditions, including effectiveness of the required Registration Statements on Form 10s to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and consents, including under various funding agreements previously entered into by the Company. The intent of the spinoffs is to create three (or two) public companies, each of which can focus on its own strengths and operational plans. On July 24, 2017, we announced that the Big South Fork Medical Center, which opened in August 2017, received CMS regional office licensure approval. On January 31, 2018, we announced that we had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement to acquire an acute care hospital in Jamestown, Tennessee known as Tennova Healthcare - Jamestown. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2018. Going forward, we expect that these two hospitals will provide us additional revenue and cash flow sources.

During 2017, we entered into financings as follows:

In 2017, we received short-term advances from Christopher Diamantis, a member of our Board of Directors, in the amount of $3.3 million. On March 7, 2017, we issued a promissory note to Mr. Diamantis in the amount of $3.8 million (the “2017 Diamantis Note”) in connection with the advances we received in 2017, plus accrued and unpaid interest reflecting the advances we received in both fiscal 2016 and 2017, in the amount of $0.5 million.

On February 2, 2017, we issued $1.59 million of convertible debentures (the “February Debentures”) and warrants to purchase shares of our common stock and received cash proceeds of $1.5 million.

On March 21, 2017, we issued $10.85 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Secured Original Issue Discount Convertible Debentures due two years from the date of issuance (the “Convertible Debentures”) and three series of warrants to purchase shares of our common stock to several accredited investors. We received net proceeds from this transaction in the approximate amount of $8.4 million. We used $3.8 million of the net proceeds to repay the 2017 Diamantis Note and $0.75 million of the net proceeds to make a partial repayment on the TCA Debenture (as defined below). The remainder of the net proceeds was used for general corporate purposes. In conjunction with the issuance of the Convertible Debentures, the holder of the February Debentures exchanged these debentures for $2.7 million of new debentures (the “Exchange Debentures” and, collectively with the Convertible Debentures, the “March Debentures”) on the same terms as, and pari passu with, the Convertible Debentures and warrants. Additionally, the holders of an aggregate of $2.2 million stated value of our Series H Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series H Preferred Stock”) exchanged such preferred stock into $2.5 million principal amount of Exchange Debentures and warrants. All of the March Debentures contain a 24% original issue discount.

On June 2, 2017 and June 22, 2017, we issued $1.9 million aggregate principal amount of Original Issue Discount Debentures due three months from the date of issuance of these two issuances (collectively, the “June Debentures”) and warrants to purchase shares of common stock to accredited investors for a purchase price of $1.8 million and cash proceeds of $1.5 million.

On July 17, 2017, we closed an offering of $4,136,862 aggregate principal amount of Original Issue Discount Debentures due October 17, 2017 and warrants to purchase shares of common stock for consideration of $2,000,000 in cash and the exchange of the $1,902,700 aggregate principal amount of Original Issue Discount Debentures due September 22, 2017 that were issued by us on June 22, 2017.

On September 19, 2017, we closed an offering of $2,604,000 principal amount of Senior Secured Original Issue Discount Convertible Debentures due September 19, 2019 (the “New Debentures”), and three series of warrants to purchase shares of our common stock. The offering was pursuant to the terms of a Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of August 31, 2017, between us and certain of our existing institutional investors. We received proceeds of $2,100,000 from the offering.

Also on September 19, 2017, we closed exchanges by which the holders of our July Debentures exchanged $4,136,862 principal amount of such debentures for $6,412,136 principal amount of new debentures and warrants on the same items as, and pari passu with, the New Debentures (the “September Exchange Debentures” and, together with the New Debentures, the “September Debentures”). All issuance amounts of the September Debentures reflect a 24% original issue discount.

On October 30, 2017, we closed an offering of $4,960,000 stated value of our newly-authorized Series I-1 Preferred Stock. The offering was pursuant to the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of October 30, 2017, between us and certain of our existing institutional investors. We received proceeds of $4,000,000 from the offering.

During the fourth quarter of 2017, holders of a portion of common stock warrants issued in March 2017 paid the Company $0.6 million upon the exercise of 663,000 warrants.

Subsequent to December 31, 2017, we received $2.0 million from the issuance of debentures and $0.8 million from the sale of stock we owned as more fully discussed in Note 20 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

As of December 31, 2017, we were party to the following legal matters:

Biohealth Medical Laboratory, Inc, and PB Laboratories, LLC (the “Companies”) filed suit against CIGNA Health in 2015 alleging that CIGNA failed to pay claims for laboratory services the Companies provided to patients pursuant to CIGNA - issued and CIGNA - administered plans. In 2016, the U.S. District Court dismissed part of the Companies’ claims for lack of standing. The Companies appealed that decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which in late 2017 reversed the District Court’s decision and found that the Companies have standing to raise claims arising out of traditional insurance plans as well as self-funded plans.

The Company’s Epinex Diagnostics Laboratories, Inc. subsidiary was sued in a California state court by two former employees who alleged that they were wrongfully terminated, as well as for a variety of unpaid wage claims. The parties entered into a settlement agreement of this matter on July 29, 2016 for approximately $0.2 million, and the settlement was consummated on August 25, 2016. In October of 2016, the plaintiffs in this matter filed a motion with the court seeking payment for attorneys’ fees in the approximate amount of $0.7 million. On March 24, 2017, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for payment of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $0.3 million, and the Company has accrued this amount in its condensed consolidated financial statements. Additionally, the Company is seeking indemnification for these amounts from Epinex Diagnostics, Inc. (“EDI”), the seller of Epinex Diagnostic Laboratories, Inc. (“EDL”), pursuant to a Stock Purchase Agreement entered into by and among the parties.

In February 2016, the Company received notice that the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) placed a lien against Medytox Solutions, Inc. and its subsidiaries relating to unpaid 2014 taxes due, plus penalties and interest, in the amount of $5.0 million. The Company paid $0.1 million toward its 2014 tax liability on March 2016. The Company filed its 2015 Federal tax return on March 15, 2016 and the accompanying election to carryback the reported net operating losses was filed in April 2016. On August 24, 2016, the lien was released, and on September of 2016 the Company received a refund from the IRS in the amount of $1.9 million. In November of 2016, the IRS commenced an audit of the Company’s 2015 Federal tax return. The Company is currently unable to predict the outcome of the audit or any liability to the Company that may result from the audit.

On September 27, 2016, a tax warrant was issued against the Company by the Florida Department of Revenue (the “DOR”) for unpaid 2014 state income taxes in the approximate amount of $0.9 million, including penalties and interest. On January 25, 2017, the Company paid the DOR $250,000 as partial payment on this liability, and in February 2017 the Company entered into a Stipulation Agreement with the DOR which allows the Company to make monthly installment payments of $35,000 until February 2018 and negotiate a new payment agreement then, if the balance of $0.3 million cannot be satisfied in a lump sum. If at any time during the Stipulation period the Company fails to timely file any required tax returns with the DOR or does not meet the payment obligations under the Stipulation Agreement, the entire amount due will be accelerated. $0.5 million remains outstanding to the DOR at December 31, 2017.

In December of 2016, TCS-Florida, L.P. (“Tetra”), filed suit against the Company for failure to make the required payments under an equipment leasing contract that the Company had with Tetra (see Note 11). On January 3, 2017, Tetra received a Default Judgment against the Company in the amount of $2.6 million, representing the balance owed on the leases, as well as additional interest, penalties and fees. The Company has recognized this amount in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2016. In January and February of 2017, the Company made payments to Tetra in connection with this judgment aggregating to $0.7 million, and on February 15, 2017, the Company entered into a forbearance agreement with Tetra whereby the remaining $1.9 million due will be paid in 24 equal monthly installments. Payments commenced on May 1, 2017. $1.3 million monthly payments remain outstanding to Tetra at December 31, 2017. The Company and Tetra have agreed to dispose of certain equipment and reduce the balance owed by amounts received.

In December of 2016, DeLage Landen Financial Services, Inc. (“DeLage”), filed suit against the Company for failure to make the required payments under an equipment leasing contract that the Company had with DeLage (see Note 8). On January 24, 2017, DeLage received a default judgment against the Company in the approximate amount of $1.0 million, representing the balance owed on the lease, as well as additional interest, penalties and fees. The Company has recognized this amount in its consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2016. On February 8, 2017, a Stay of Execution was filed and under its terms the balance due will be paid in variable monthly installments through January of 2019, with an implicit interest rate of 4.97%. The Company is in default of its payments to DeLage.

On December 7, 2016, the holders of the Tegal Notes (see Note 7) filed suit against the Company seeking payment for the amounts due under the notes in the aggregate of $0.4 million, including accrued interest. A request for entry of default judgment was filed on January 24, 2017. These amounts remain outstanding at December 31, 2017.

In November 2017 a former shareholder of Genomas filed suit against the Company for payment of a Note payable by the subsidiary Genomas. This Note is recorded in the financial statements of the subsidiary and is not payable directly from the Company. Other claims were included in the suit which the Company believes to be frivolous and without merit. The Company has filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims. The Company does not deem this suit to be material.

The Company and subsidiaries have been party to suits filed by landlords for late payment of rent and have either settled these claims or are in process of agreeing to settlement. The Company does not deem these actions to be material.

The following table presents our capital resources as of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016:

The following table presents the major sources and uses of cash for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

The components of cash used in operations for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 is presented in the following table:

The increase in cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2017 is due to the acquisition of Hospital assets.

Cash provided by financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2017 consists of $4.0 million received from the issuance of preferred stock, and $15.7 million from the issuance of debentures and warrants, partially offset by the $3.9 million of related party payments, net of advances, and repayment of capital lease obligations in the amount of $1.7 million. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we received proceeds from the issuance of equity securities of $19.3 million, partially offset by the redemption of preferred stock in the amount of $8.3 million, received proceeds from the issuance of non-related party debt in the amount of $5.4 million, made net repayments of related party debt in the amount of $4.4 million and made payments on capital leases of $0.9 million.

We need to raise additional funds immediately and continuing until we begin to realize cash flow from operations.

The terms of certain of the warrants, convertible preferred stock and convertible debentures issued by the Company provide for reductions in the per share exercise prices of the warrants and the per share conversion prices of the debentures and preferred stock (if applicable and subject to a floor in certain cases), in the event that the Company issues common stock or common stock equivalents (as that term is defined in the agreements) at an effective exercise/conversion price that is less than the then exercise/conversion prices of the outstanding warrants, preferred stock and debentures. In addition, the majority of these equity-based securities contain prices that vary based upon the price of the Company’s common stock on the date of exercise/conversion (see Notes 8, 11 and 12 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements). These provisions have resulted in significant dilution of the Company’s common stock and have given rise to reverse splits of the Company’s common stock. As a result of these down round provisions, the potential common stock equivalents totaled 17.3 billion as of April1 1, 2018.

Proposals Submitted to Stockholders

On March 14, 2018, the Company gave notice of a special meeting of the stockholders of the Company to be held on May 2, 2018, at 11:00 a.m., local time, to, among other things:

1. Approve an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, to effect a reverse stock split of all of the outstanding shares of its common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at a specific ratio within a range from 1-for-50 to 1-for-300, and to grant authorization to its Board of Directors to determine, in its discretion, the specific ratio and timing of the reverse stock split any time before March 1, 2019, subject to the Board of Directors’ discretion to abandon such amendment; and

2. Approve an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, to increase the number of authorized shares of our common stock from 500,000,000 to 3,000,000,000 shares.

The Board of Directors has fixed the close of business on March 12, 2018 as the record date for the determination of stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Special Meeting.

A portion of the proposed increase in the number of authorized shares of the Company’s common stock and the proposal to approve a discretionary reverse stock split are necessary primarily due to the recent declines in the Company’s stock price. The declines have resulted in the number of shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding common stock warrants and upon conversion of outstanding debentures and preferred stock to exceed the 500,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock that are currently authorized.

OTHER MATTERS

Inflation

We do not believe inflation has a significant effect on the Company’s operations at this time.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Under SEC regulations, we are required to disclose the Company’s off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that are material to investors. Off-balance sheet arrangements consist of transactions, agreements or contractual arrangements to which any entity that is not consolidated with us is a party, under which we have:

As of December 31, 2017, the Company had no off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a current or future effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to investors.

De-Listing of the Company’s Common Stock

On April 18, 2017, the Company was notified by Nasdaq that the stockholders’ equity balance reported on the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 fell below the $2.5 million minimum requirement for continued listing under The Nasdaq Capital Market’s Listing Rule 5550(b)(1) (the “Rule”). In accordance with the Rule, the Company submitted a plan to Nasdaq outlining how it intended to regain compliance. On August 17, 2017, Nasdaq notified the Company that its plan to correct the stockholders’ equity deficiency did not contain sufficient evidence to support a correction being achieved in the required time frame. The Company appealed this decision to a Hearing Panel which, on October 23, 2017, maintained this position and denied the Company a continued listing. Effective October 25, 2017, the Company’s common stock (RNVA) and warrants to purchase common stock (RNVAW) were no longer listed on The Nasdaq Captial Market but began trading on the OTCQB instead.

Not applicable.

Index to Financial Statements

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of

Rennova Health, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets of Rennova Health, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the related Consolidated Statements of Operations, Stockholders’ Deficit, and Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the related notes (collectively referred to as 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 the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (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 financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the 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 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 financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Going Concern

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As shown in the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company has significant net losses, cash flow deficiencies, negative working capital and accumulated deficit. Those conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans regarding those matters are described in Note 1. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ Green & Company, CPAs

Green & Company, CPAs

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2015.

Tampa, FL 33618

April 24, 2018

RENNOVA HEALTH, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS