Good morning, and welcome to Aveanna's Healthcare Holdings Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2022 Earnings Conference Call. Today's call is being recorded and we have allocated one hour for prepared remarks and Q&A. At this time, I'd like to turn the call over to Shannon Drake, Aveanna's, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary. Thank you. You may begin.

Thanks, Kamila. Good morning, and welcome to Aveanna's fourth quarter 2022 call. My name is Shannon Drake, the company's Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary. With me today is Jeff Shaner, our Chief Executive Officer; and Dave Afshar, our Chief Financial Officer. During this call, we will make forward-looking statements. Risk factors that may impact those statements and could cause actual future results to differ materially from currently projected results are described in this morning's press release and the reports we filed with the SEC. The company does not undertake any duty to update such forward-looking statements. Additionally, during today's call, we will discuss certain non-GAAP measures, which we believe can be useful in evaluating our performance. The presentation of this additional information should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for results prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of these measures can be found in this morning's press release, which is posted on our website, aveanna.com, and in our most recent annual report on Form 10-K. With that, I will turn the call over to Aveanna's Chief Executive Officer, Jeff Shaner. Jeff?

Thank you, Shannon. Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. We appreciate each of you investing your time this morning to better understand our Q4 and full year 2022 results and how we are moving forward at a [technical difficulty]. My initial comments will briefly highlight our fourth quarter results, along with the steps we are taking to address the labor markets, and our ongoing efforts with government and commercial payers to create additional capacity. I will then provide some thoughts regarding our outlook for 2023, prior to turning the call over to Dave to provide further details into the quarter and our outlook. Starting with some highlights for the quarter. Revenue was approximately $451 million, representing a 9% increase over the prior period. Gross margin was $128.8 million or 28.5%, a 3.5% increase over prior year period. And finally, adjusted EBITDA was $29.7 million, representing a 35% decrease when compared to the prior year, primarily due to the costs associated with the current labor environment. As we have previously discussed, the labor environment represents the primary challenge that we need to address in 2023, to see Aveanna begin to resume the growth trajectory that we believe our company can achieve. It is important to note that our industry does not have a demand problem. The demand for home and community-based care has never been higher with both state and federal governments and managed care organizations asking for solutions that can create more capacity. To begin to capitalize on this demand and free up labor capacity, we are undertaking several initiatives. First and foremost, our ability to recruit and retain the best talent is a function of a rate. Our business model offers a preferred work setting that is mission-driven, providing a deep sense of purpose for our…

Thanks, Jeff, and good morning. First, I'll talk about our fourth quarter financial results and liquidity before providing detail on our outlook for 2023, starting with the top line. We saw revenues rise 9% over last year to $451 million. We saw revenue growth across all three of our operating segments with private duty services, home health and hospice, and Medical Solutions growing by 9.3%, 12.4% and 0.7%, respectively. Consolidated adjusted EBITDA was $29.7 million, a 35% decrease as compared to the prior year. Now taking a deeper look into each of our segments. Starting with private-duty services, revenue for the quarter was approximately $361 million, a 9.3% increase and was driven by approximately 9.6 million hours of care, a volume increase of 6.1% over the prior year. And while volumes improved over the prior year, we continue to be constrained in our top line growth due to the shortage of available caregivers. Q4 revenue per hour of 3,766 was up $0.82 sequentially from Q3 or 2.2%, and we were pleased with the rate improvement we experienced throughout 2022. Turning to our cost of labor and gross margin metrics, we achieved $91.9 million of gross margin or 25.4%, a 0.8% decrease from the prior year quarter. Our cost of revenue rate of $28.08 reflects the commitment we've made to passing through our rate wins to our caregivers as well as continued rate pressures that we see in the labor market. Our Q4 spread per hour was $958, we experienced improvement in our preferred payer volumes with select payers year-to-date organic growth rates reaching the low double digits. We continue to be encouraged with our ability to attract caregivers and address the market demand for our services when we obtain adequate rates. Moving on to our home health and hospice segment.…

[Operator Instructions] Thank you. And our first question is from Brian Tanquilut with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning. You have Taji on for Brian. And thank you taking my question. So Jeff, as I think about the three priorities that you laid out for the year. I just kind of want to dive deeper into the preferred payer strategy. As it relates to your guidance, is the 10% improvement that you're expecting by the end of the year already embedded in the guidance? And if not, can you kind of just quantify what that flow-through would look like to the bottom line?

Yes. Taj, good morning. Thanks for joining this morning. I think -- I'm going to go back to our prepared remarks for a minute and just say as we think of our guidance, we recognize our guidance is likely conservative yet as we sit at this point, very, very prudent. I think as Dave and I have thought about the year, we felt like it was important to kind of reset expectations and then show our commitment to beating those expectations. As you think of the year, Taji you think of our - especially our three states we talked about California, Texas, Oklahoma, most of those or all of those rate increases would be effective in Q3 and the being of Q4. So if you listen to Dave's comments, our guidance would suggest that second half of the year is significantly greater than first half of the year, I think Dave talked about 43% of the guidance in the first half of the year and implies 57% of the guide in the second half of the year. And really, the driver of that is two things. It's the rate we just talked about the improvement in rate driving the second half of the year. But also one of our key initiatives this year was to identify and reduce costs where appropriate, both in corporate and field. And so as some of those cost reductions play out through the year, we see a greater profitability in the second half of the year. But those are the two primary drivers of that. We don't comment on any specific state and the actual revenue or percentage growth in any specific state. But those are the two biggest drivers, Taji, of our guidance. And yes, they are baked into our at least $130 million, but I think we also recognize that it's prudent for us to be conservative at this point.

Great, thanks for that color. And just one more follow-up just on the labor front just curious, I guess, how your metrics that you've seen in Q4 have trended in relation to the beginning of the year, right? And essentially, how does the outlook look currently, right? Like are you seeing an uptick in applications as your retention improving throughout the year? We'd just love to see how that's been trending as the years go on?

Absolutely, absolutely and it's a great question, Taji. Like many of our peers, we experienced positive recruitment applications and hiring trends right out of the New Year. So coming out of the holidays, we saw more applications. We saw more people interested in coming back to work, new and these were new applicants, applicants who had not worked with us before. So that was a nice trend out of the New Year. And I think we've seen our peers experience similar trends. I think the part that we would want to pound home though is those are good trends. They're not as good as our preferred payer trends. And our preferred payer strategy, as we laid out, as we talked about today, we're seeing caregiver hires pushing three times greater than our non-preferred payers. So our preferred payers value our value proposition. They believe in our value proposition paying us an appropriate wage - sorry, appropriate rate that allows us to pay at least a market level wage, if not slightly above the market level wage. And because of that, we're seeing in that 10% of our PDS volumes, really the ability to be hiring out in front of the market. And everyone is winning. What we're staffing is we talked about 15% to 20% greater staffing rates with our preferred payers, we're bringing children home at a pace of almost five or six times greater than a non-preferred payer. So I think we highlight that to say even though the trends out of the first of the year were positive, our strategy is not to expect the wage market to settle or nurses just to come back and drove, our strategy is to drive rate and reinvest rate into wage and outpace the market specifically in our PDS business. I would say, in our home health and hospice business, we're certainly competing with our peer group in that space. And I will say that at least wages have seen in the last three to four months to have settled. And I think settled is probably the best word I can use. They don't seem to be continue to be going up. And so we're focused just on retaining, engaging and maintaining the core caregiving staff we have in the home health and hospice side. Hopefully, that was helpful.

Very helpful, thank you.

Thanks Taji.

Thank you. Our next question is from Joanna Gajuk with Bank of America. Please proceed with your question.

Good morning, thanks for taking the question here. So I guess - can I use this as a follow-up to the prior question, which I didn't feel like I got the answer here in terms of the preferred payer strategy and the increasing I guess, growth from that. Is that actually specifically included in the guidance or not? Because I guess you made it sound like that you have seen the rate increases in the cost guide, but you didn't highlight the perfect strategy and whether it's actually included in the guidance?

Hey, good morning Joanna. Thanks for your question. Yes, in our 130 guidance, it does include the idea of rate increases. I think as we said in my prepared remarks, we're highly focused on these three states in this year because we feel like these three states are not currently competitive with the market wages for nurses in those states. And we think we think it's highly, highly important for California, Texas and Oklahoma to move those rates so that we can attract nurses and help solve the value proposition, which is getting patients home, and yes, we did bake the idea of overall rates into our guidance. Now in our prepared remarks, we talked about we are asking in all of those states for double-digit rate increases. And our full year guide doesn't - does not fully bake in the idea of these three states giving us double-digit rate increases. It's overall rate increases. But if you think of California, the last rate increase they gave us, it was July of 2018, and that rate is no longer market. And we talked about that in the last couple of earnings calls. And so we are aggressively lobbying, using media campaigns, meeting with the governor's office, meeting with legislatures in California. And we fully expect California to give us a sizable rate increase, not because of any other reason, then the value proposition says, if you pay a nurse of fair wage in California, we can staff the cases and we can bring these children's home. We've got research in California that shows us that we save around $6,000 a day. So bringing a child home one day faster in the state of California saves California Medicaid systems $6,000 a day, that value proposition is landing very well in the legislature as well as the Governor's office and Medical itself, they understand investing in our services truly saves total health care costs for states like California. And although $6,000 sounds like a lot in California, it's not materially different than any other state we operate in. We save the system between $4,000 and $6,000 a day by bringing a patient home one day faster. So I hope that addresses the guidance question, but we have a strong level of conviction on continuing to move both legislative rates and, at the same time, moving our managed care and commercial payers from being a payer to a preferred partner. And as we define a preferred partner is both above market rate as well as value-based incentive payments.

Yes, thanks for the additional color, because I guess it's an important part to understand what you include in the guidance now for the rates, I guess, is a little bit lower than maybe what you're asking for, which is prudent. And my question is in your 10-K, you disclosed $12 million higher general professional liability expense associated with the accrued legal settlements? So can you tell us what does it relate to? And I guess it looks like that's included in the cost of services in the PDS segment. So is it fair to adjust it because you also mentioned almost a similar amount when it comes to it sounds like lower COVID-related costs. So I just want to clarify how we should think about gross margin in the PDS segment for this quarter, adjusting for these items? Thank you.

Sure, Joanna. So yes, there's a legal matter that we've been defending that originally rose back in 2019, and in connection with those with legal matters we accrued additional legal settlement costs in the end of Q4. Those matters are currently under appeal, and we intend to avail ourselves of all appellate options as we disclosed in the 10-K. And so, we continue to work through that matter. As we go, you're right, that was an additional approximate $12 million in the current quarter. A year ago quarter, what you saw was just that we had we did not have the $12 million of incremental COVID-related costs from a year ago. But I think just - to answer what I think your question might be is that we see our PDS spread in the $10 to $10.50 range and I think that's what you could probably expect in Q1.

And Joanna, we felt it was prudent to kind of put that on the boat, put it behind us, at least from a GAAP accounting standpoint, we thought that, that was very prudent to do to kind of clean that up at the end of the year. Outside of that, our Q4 spread would have been in the $10.50, $10.60 range. I think as Dave said, we have a payroll tax in Q1. So, we think that will be in the $10.30 to $10.50 range for Q1.

Okay, thank you. And if I may sneak in on the home health segment, so you said that you're seeing some improvement there, I guess, both in cost reduction [ph] Q3 and you're still excited about that business. Can you talk about the reimbursement of 2023 the rates? And I guess we're waiting for the '24 proposal to come out, so - what do you expect to see in this proposed, do you expect a second half of the behavior adjustment will be included for '24? And I guess, if you do, can you talk about how you trying to offset that the rates growing much less than your cost? Thank you.

Yes, that's a great question. Thanks, Joanna. First, let us go on record with the entire home health and hospice industry by saying we do not think that, that putting the behavioral adjustment in 2024 is the right thing to do. We stand firm with the entire National Association for Home Care, all of our peers by saying that is a devastating temporary rate impact to the business, it's unnecessary certainly inflation in the last three years of inflation have outpaced the basically flat to slightly negative rate in home health. So let me go on record by saying Aveanna supports the industry and saying that that's not a good outcome. With that said, we are expecting rate to be continue to be a headwind or choppy for the next few years in home health. And because of that, we're focused on now, as Dave mentioned, we're fully operational, fully implemented Homecare Homebase. We're focused on operating the business, doing the things that we can do to provide the best care with the best outcomes and also provide an appropriate gross margin and margin profile. Part of that is we are committed to being an episodic reimbursed home health business. And in our comments, we commented that we're 63% episodic business. We're slightly ahead of that in the first quarter 2023. And I think we're ahead of the industry in that, that we stay committed to being an episodic reimbursed primary reimbursed focus. The flip side of that is we're not going to give away our limited home health and hospice clinical resources for discounted payers and discounted prices. And so, we would rather take our resources and put them with the payers that value our services. And because of that, I think that we can stay and achieve and stay in that 45% to 46%, maybe 47% gross margin range here in 2023 and truly continue to grow the home health and hospice segment, but also maintain profitability at the gross margin and contribution line. Thanks, Joanna.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Raj Kumar with Stephens Inc. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, yes this is Raja with Scott Fidel. So you just called out where you expect home health and hospice gross margins to land in 2023. So could you kind of - can you provide more insight into where you expect that to be for PDS and Medical Solutions business as well?

Yes, Raj. I think - and Dave put it in some of his prepared remarks, AMS, we fully expect to stay in that 42% to 43% range. As you look at Q4, you'll see we had a little bit of reserve adjustment in the quarter that brought it down just below 40%, but strong expectations for Medical Solutions this year, we'll be right in that 42% to 43%, maybe 43.5% gross margin range. And then if you normalize PDS for that legal reserve that we took, we're still in that 28.5%, just shy of 29% gross margin. I think, we would tell you that's probably where we'll land in 2023, even though we're shifting volume away from lower-paying payers towards more appropriate paying payers with our preferred payer strategy. We will continue to pass on that incremental portion to our nurses and our caregivers to drive our volume growth. So, I think you'll see us stay in that, Dave, I would say 28% to 29%, maybe slightly above 29% from a gross margin in PDS.

Right yes thank you for the color. And then as a follow-up, what are your expectations for operating cash flow and CapEx in 2023? And then what do you expect leverage to come to in 2023, at the end of 2023?

Thanks, Raj. I'll hop it to Dave here in a second. I think it's just important. Dave and I are both very confident in our overall liquidity position. And I give Dave credit, a couple of years ago he hedged all of our debt. Virtually all of our debt is hedged. And we have a great lending group. We have great equity partners that are fully committed to Aveanna. So as we think of overall liquidity, I think Dave and I both feel very confident. I do want to give Dave in his collection team's credit they've done an unbelievable job in collecting our cash. We just ended 2022. We basically collected 99.99% of our revenue for the year. So 100% of our revenue was collected in cash in '22, which is a phenomenal outcome in this business. And then Dave just does a really nice job managing our cash position, making sure that we've got ample room for borrowing capacity. So that we can manage our business and invest in the business so as I talk today, I just want to say, I'm as a new guy, as a new CEO, I am very confident in our overall liquidity position, and just that we've got a great team with a lot of tenure managing the important parts like collections, like cash management. So I think we're in a great position as we start the year, and we've got opportunity to invest in our company as needed.

Thanks Jeff. And just to add on with regarding the question on CapEx, we're judicious with the CapEx dollars this year. So in the past, we've seen CapEx at around 1% of revenue. I think we'll see lower than that this year so judicious with the CapEx dollars. In terms of operating cash flow, our goal is to turn operating cash positive in the second half of the year. So we're working towards that. And we think we'll make significant improvements from where we landed last year, both on operating cash and free cash flow. The one thing I will call out is as we look at our cash flows as we go across 2023 is based on how we account for our derivatives since we don't use hedge accounting, the benefits of our interest rate caps will come through operating cash flows. Benefits of our interest rate swaps will come through financing cash flows. And that's one of the reasons why we focus on free cash flow to incorporate the benefits of our interest rate swaps in 2023.

Right, thank you very much.

Thanks Raj, appreciate you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Pito Chickering with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your question.

Hi guys, we have Benjamin Shaver on for Pito. Thanks for taking the question. So when you're looking at the leadership at the central level and also at the divisional level, do you guys believe you have the right team in place or do you think there needs to be some adjustments in 2023? Thank you.

Hi Benefit, good morning. Great question and Ben, I think as you think about our organization, I made the comment about our - the experience and maturity we've got at our cash collections, RCM, as I look out in the business and actually all three of our business divisions, our division presidents or our region presidents, they average between a low of 20 years of experience in the high of 30 to 35 years of experience, most of those years have been with us or with companies that we've run in the past, whether it be Gentiva, Health Field, PSA. And so, as we think down in the business, both at the payer relations, government affairs, sales, clinical oversight, operating side of the business, all the way down through the business down to the actual branch locations, we've got a tremendous amount of tenure, both on the Medicaid side, the private duty side, on the home health and hospice side as well as our medical solutions team. And so we are blessed in the fact that we've got a deep bench of 10-year talent. We're having - we're bringing some new blood in, some younger blood ends, even the younger folks in, so we can continue to replenish the talent as many of our leaders are in their second and third decade of leading post-acute health care companies. But I don't worry every night about the quality of our leadership team at any level in our organization. I will say, and you've heard us say this before, in the last two years, we took one FTE in payer relations and government affairs to now approaching 20 bodies. So we have significantly increased our government payer relations teams and we continue to invest in those teams because they are producing the greatest outcome for our company. I'll also mention that we've made significant investments in our clinical outcomes, our data analysis and the ability to prove our value-based story through clinical outcomes. So our clinical team has grown as well. And that's part of why we talked about cost reductions, and we've invested significant dollars in these core areas, at the same time, we're going to go back through the business and just find areas where we can be more efficient and more effective so that we can truly get our profitability back up towards that 10% goal, we've had all along. Thanks, I appreciate the question.

And just one more follow-up real quick, I appreciate the color you gave on kind of free cash flow conversion, but do you guys have any leverage ratio that you're shooting for coming out of '23?

We don't typically provide guidance on leverage. I mean, obviously, we'd all like it to be lower, as we drive our operating cash and drive our free cash, the ultimate goal of that is to ultimately build cash on the balance sheet and lower our net debt and leverage. So, I'd just say that we're very focused on operating the business and driving all the benefits that Jeff and I have talked about. And like we said, getting to positive free cash - I'm sorry, positive operating cash in the second half and just driving on all fronts there.

I appreciate, thank you.

Thanks Ben.

Thank you. And our next question is from Ben Hendrix with RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, Ben good morning.

Good morning, thank you very much. And just a quick follow-up on those executive - or I'm sorry, on the PD legislation efforts in California, Texas and Oklahoma, just wondering if you could kind of handicap each of those and kind of let us know what your thoughts are on kind of the probability of actually getting those at a double-digit level that you're expecting, where is the biggest headwinds? Where is the most likelihood and kind of how you're handicapping that increase overall? Thanks.

Great, question Ben. And yes, I think I'll state the obvious, and that is the value proposition is the same conversation in every 1 of our 33 states. It's the same, it's not unique to California compared to Oklahoma. It's the same exact conversation, which is just investing an additional $150 to $200 a day in incremental nursing wages in the home saves you between $4,000 and $6,000 a day, right? And it's - the research shows that our medically fragile patient population is spending anywhere between a minimum of 30, a maximum of 90 extra days in children's hospitals that is unnecessary for their care because there's not enough home nursing services. So the research, the conversation is the same across, what's different is each state has its own budget process, its own set of issues, its own set of priorities. And so that's really where we get into the -- to your point, the uniqueness in each state. At the end of the day, I would tell you I believe firmly that California, Texas and Oklahoma will all pass through PDS rate increases. I'm hopeful that, that will be in this legislative session in 2023. And I think I think they - the legislatures that we have talked to in the States, we've spoken with the Governor's offices in all three states, they understand the issue. They are supportive of the issue. I think what it comes down to sometimes Ben is sometimes there's just other macro stuff going on. And if you take California as an example, sometimes there's just macro stuff going on in the state that has nothing to do with nursing, children, home services that just takes the attention of a governor or a legislature away from an important issue like ours. And so,…

That's great, thank you very much.

Thanks Ben, appreciate it.

[Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Matt Borsch with Water Tower Research. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning and thanks for squeezing me in. I had a question about - I know demand trends are not an issue. You've got more demand than can be handled for yourselves in the industry. But how do you see that evolving on the PDS side for maybe in the near term and longer term? I mean it's more clear we can see that the accelerators of demand on the adult home health side. Can you just talk to that?

Yes Matt and good morning. Thanks for the question. I think - there are more children who need more home care services in America than there are home care companies to take them home are the appropriate rate. So, we don't lose sleep at night on is our demand 18 months, 24 months, 36 months in the future, going to be less, more equal to on the PDS side of the business. I think as the federal government has leaned into home and community-based services, which is now a defined term in CMS and the federal government that's good for us. That is a broader group of families who can receive both highly, acute skills at home, moderate acute skills at home and even lesser acute skills at home. And I think as we think of the long-term macro 10-year outlook, I think PDS has got great tailwinds from a long-term demand standpoint, it truly will come down to the supply of caregivers, both family caregivers in the home and skilled acute nurses that are coming to the home. And so again, it's a great question. To us, the long-term demand metrics for PDS still make a ton of sense, and it continues to be a supply issue for as far as we can see in the next three to five years, it truly continues to be the ability to attract and retain both skilled and lesser skilled caregivers.

And maybe just a follow-up on a different topic, I know you've talked a lot about the rate side of the business. And I gather that on the rate side, a lot of the problem is organizational attention and initiative, whether you're talking about a state agency or managed care commercial payer. Is that about right or do you have some of these, because you can say, higher rate is going to save you money. And do you find that you have real opposition to that argument or people with a different theory?

No. But by the way, your question is very thoughtful, Matt. And that is a lot of times it's just giving the attention, right? It's getting the attention of the legislature of Texas or the Governor and getting their attention to matter. As I think of MCO payer partners, it's a similar conversation. It's just that the MCO partners figured it out faster, that they see, hey, I can say, $5,000 a day. Even if they start giving us what's called single case agreements, which mean that they approve one family at a time at a new rate, we see the MCO partners moving in a matter of hours and days versus months and years from our state partners. So the MCO partners are just able to move faster than their legislative counterparts. I will say, over the first - we're about 18 months into this strategy. We now have markets where we have a preferred payer in a specific market and then we have non-preferred payers, the non-preferred payers. It took them about nine months to call us and say, why can I get any of your nurses? And our answer was, because unfortunately, you're not you're not a partner of ours in this market. And so we've seen MCO payers go from not interested now, not now to, "Oh my God, what do I have to do to get what the other pay in this market has gotten from Aveanna which to us shows the power of the partnership, and I think, again, I'll go back to the legislative comment. I think you read into it right. It's just getting the attention of the right people in a legislative process like a California to understand the issue. They all get the issue. They -- it's not hard to sell the issue. It's just getting their attention from floods and snow and gas prices and all the other stuff that's on their desk to deal with in making this a priority. And that's really our job is to - and our lobbyist job is to just drive this home.

Great, thank you. I'm pushing out.

Thank you, Matt.

There are no further questions at this time. I would like to turn the floor back over to CEO, Jeff Shaner for closing comments.

Well, thank you, operator, and to everyone. Thank you for joining our earnings call today. And most importantly, thank you for your interest in our Aveanna story we look forward to updating you on our progress at the end of Q1 in mid-May. Have a great day, and operator, thanks so much.

Thank you. This concludes today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.