Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

FORM 10-Q

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

5995 Plaza Drive, Cypress, California 90630

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code) (714) 952-1121

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.

Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes x No o

There were approximately 86,138,000 shares of common stock outstanding on April 30, 2004.

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

FORM 10-Q

INDEX

i

Table of Contents

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

All applicable share and per share amounts reflect the retroactive effects of the two-for-one common stock split in the form of a stock dividend that was effective January 20, 2004.

See accompanying notes.

1

Table of Contents

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

All applicable share and per share amounts reflect the retroactive effects of the two-for-one common stock split in the form of a stock dividend that was effective January 20, 2004.

See accompanying notes.

2

Table of Contents

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

Table continued on next page.

See accompanying notes.

3

Table of Contents

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)

Table continued from previous page.

See accompanying notes.

4

Table of Contents

PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

1.     Basis of Presentation

PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. offers managed care and other health insurance products to employer groups and Medicare beneficiaries primarily in eight western states and Guam. Our commercial and senior medical plans are designed to deliver quality health care and customer service to members cost-effectively. These programs include health maintenance organizations, or HMOs, preferred provider organizations, or PPOs, and Medicare Supplement products. We also offer a variety of specialty managed care products and services that employees can purchase as a supplement to our basic commercial and senior plans or as stand-alone products. These products include pharmacy benefit management, or PBM, services, behavioral health services, group life and health insurance and dental and vision benefit plans.

Following the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, we have omitted footnote disclosures that would substantially duplicate the disclosures contained in our annual audited financial statements. The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read together with the consolidated financial statements and the notes included in our December 31, 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC in March 2004.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments, consisting solely of normal recurring adjustments, needed to present fairly the financial results for these interim periods. The condensed consolidated results of operations presented for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results for a full year.

Premium revenues are earned from products where we bear insured risk. Non-premium revenues are earned from all other sources, including revenues from our PBM mail order business, administrative fees and other revenue.

All intercompany transactions and accounts are eliminated in consolidation.

We reclassified certain prior year amounts in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements to conform to the 2004 presentation.

Effective January 1, 2003, we adopted the fair value recognition provisions of Statements of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, on a prospective basis for all employee and director awards granted, modified or settled on or after January 1, 2003, as provided by SFAS 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure. Awards granted to employees typically vest over four years. Therefore, the cost related to stock-based compensation included in the determination of net income is less than that which would have been recognized if the fair value based method had been applied to all awards granted, modified or settled since October 1, 1995. The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share, after adjusting for the effect of the two-for-one stock split in

5

Table of Contents

the form of a dividend that was effective January 20, 2004, as if the fair value method had been applied to all outstanding and unvested awards in each period.

The following table illustrates the components of our stock-based compensation expense for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003:

Convertible Subordinated Debentures. We have $135 million in aggregate principal amount of 3% convertible subordinated debentures due in 2032. The debentures are convertible into 6,428,566 shares of common stock under certain conditions, including satisfaction of a market price condition for our common stock, satisfaction of a trading price condition relating to the debentures, upon notice of redemption, or upon specified corporate transactions. Each $1,000 of the debentures is convertible into 47.619 shares of our common stock. The market price condition for conversion of the debentures is satisfied if the closing sale price of our common stock exceeds 110% of the conversion price (which is calculated at $23.10 per share) for the debentures for at least 20 trading days in the 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of any fiscal quarter. In the event that the market price condition is satisfied during any fiscal quarter, the debentures are convertible, at the option of the holder, during the following fiscal quarter. The market price condition is evaluated each quarter to determine whether the debentures will be convertible at the option of the holder during the following fiscal quarter. For the quarters ended December 31, 2003 and March 31, 2004, the market price condition described above was satisfied. As a result, the debentures were convertible during the quarter ended March 31, 2004 and remain convertible at the option of the holder at any time during the quarter ended June 30, 2004. While no debentures were converted as of March 31, 2004, they are considered common stock equivalents and are included in the

6

Table of Contents

calculation of weighted average shares outstanding on a diluted basis for the quarter ended March 31, 2004. All share and per share amounts disclosed above reflect the retroactive effects of the two-for-one common stock split in the form of a stock dividend that was effective January 20, 2004. See Note 4 “Stockholders’ Equity”.

Beginning in October 2007, we may redeem for cash all or any portion of the debentures, at a purchase price of 100% of the principal amount plus accrued interest, upon not less than 30 nor more than 60 days’ written notice to the holders. Beginning in October 2007, and in successive 5-year increments, our holders may require us to repurchase the debentures for cash at a repurchase price of 100% of the principal amount plus accrued interest. Our payment obligations under the debentures are subordinated to our senior indebtedness, and effectively subordinated to all indebtedness and other liabilities of our subsidiaries.

10 3/4% Senior Notes. We have $325 million in aggregate principal amount of 10 3/4% senior notes due in 2009. The 10 3/4% senior notes were issued in May 2002 at 99.389% of the aggregate principal amount representing a discount of $3 million that is being amortized over the term of the notes. In December 2003, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the debt agreement, we redeemed $175 million in principal of the senior notes at a redemption price equal to 110.750%, plus accrued and unpaid interest on the notes as of the redemption date. We expensed approximately $28 million in connection with the redemption, including the pro-rata write-off of the initial discount, the redemption premium and other fees and expenses associated with the transaction. We may redeem the remaining 10 3/4% senior notes at any time on or after June 1, 2006 at an initial redemption price equal to 105.375% of their principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. The redemption price will thereafter decline annually. Additionally, at any time on or prior to June 1, 2006, we may redeem the 10 3/4% senior notes upon a change of control, as defined in the indenture for the notes, at 100% of their principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make-whole” premium.

Certain of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries fully and unconditionally guarantee the 10 3/4% senior notes. Prior to September 15, 2003, some of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries were restricted from guaranteeing the 10 3/4% senior notes by the terms of the FHP International Corporation, or FHP, senior notes. As the FHP senior notes were repaid in full on September 15, 2003, these subsidiaries now fully and unconditionally guarantee the 10 3/4% senior notes. See “FHP Senior Notes” below and Note 10, “Financial Guarantees.”

In April 2003, we entered into an interest rate swap on $300 million of our 10 3/4% senior notes for the purpose of hedging the fair value of our indebtedness. This fair value hedge is accounted for using the short-cut method under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, whereby the hedge is reported in our balance sheets at fair value, and the carrying value of the long-term debt is adjusted for an offsetting amount representing changes in fair value attributable to the hedged risk. Under the terms of the agreement, we make interest payments based on the three-month London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, plus 692 basis points and receive interest payments based on the 10 3/4% fixed rate. Our rate under the swap agreement was 8.04%, at March 31, 2004 which is based on a 90-day LIBOR of 1.12% plus 692 basis points. The three-month LIBOR rate we use to determine our interest payments under the swap agreement was first established on June 2, 2003 and resets every three months thereafter, until expiration in June 2009.

Senior Credit Facility. In June 2003, we replaced our senior credit facility with a new syndicated facility with JPMorgan Chase Bank serving as the Administrative Agent. The new facility consists of a $150 million term loan, which matures on June 3, 2008, and a $150 million revolving line of credit, which matures on June 3, 2006. We used the proceeds from the term loan to repay the $131 million outstanding under the prior facility. The remaining $19 million was used to pay fees and expenses relating to the new facility and for general corporate purposes. As of March 31, 2004, we had $149 million outstanding on the term loan and no balance outstanding on the revolving line of credit. There were no borrowings under the line of credit during the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

On December 17, 2003 our senior credit facility was amended to provide for reduced interest rates per annum applicable to term loan borrowings, with the amount of margin spread for the borrowing being determined by our current debt ratings. The amended applicable rates are, at our option, either JPMorgan Chase Bank’s prime

7

Table of Contents

rate (or, if greater, the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50%) which we refer to as the alternative base rate, plus a margin spread of 1.25% to 1.75% per annum, or the LIBOR for the applicable interest period, plus a margin spread of 2.25% to 2.75% per annum. All of our borrowings under the term loan are currently LIBOR borrowings, and the current margin spread on our term loan borrowings is 2.50%. As of March 31, 2004, our term loan rate was 3.71% per annum, which is based on a 180-day LIBOR of 1.21% plus the applicable margin spread of 2.50%. The interest rates per annum under the senior credit facility applicable to revolving credit borrowings are, at our option, either the alternate base rate plus a margin spread of between 1.50% to 2.75% per annum, or the LIBOR for the applicable interest period plus a margin spread of between 2.50% to 3.75% per annum, with the amount of the margin for any borrowing being determined based on current credit ratings for the debt under the senior credit facility. Our current margins for revolving credit borrowings are 2.00% per annum for alternate base rate borrowings and 3.00% per annum for LIBOR borrowings.

The terms of the senior credit facility contain various covenants customary for financings of this type which place restrictions on our and/or our subsidiaries’ ability to incur debt, pay dividends, create liens, make investments, optionally repay, redeem or repurchase our securities, and enter into mergers, dispositions and transactions with affiliates. The senior credit facility also requires us to meet various financial ratios, including a minimum net worth requirement, a minimum fixed-charge coverage requirement and a maximum leverage ratio. At March 31, 2004, we were in compliance with all of these covenants. See “FHP Senior Notes” below and Note 10, “Financial Guarantees.”

Certain of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries provide guarantees and have granted security interests to the lenders in substantially all of their personal property in order to secure our obligations under the senior credit facility. We have also pledged the equity of certain of our subsidiaries to the lenders. Prior to September 15, 2003, some of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries were restricted from guaranteeing the senior credit facility by the terms of the FHP senior notes. As the FHP senior notes were repaid in full on September 15, 2003, these subsidiaries now fully and unconditionally guarantee the senior credit facility.

FHP Senior Notes. In September 2003, we paid in full the senior notes that we assumed when we acquired FHP in 1997. As a result, some of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries which were previously restricted from guaranteeing our 10 3/4% senior notes and our senior credit facility by the provisions of the FHP senior notes, now fully and unconditionally guarantee the 10 3/4% senior notes and the senior credit facility. See Note 10, “Financial Guarantees”.

Database Financing Agreements. As of March 31, 2004, we had $8 million outstanding under various financing agreements related to the purchase of database licenses, financial accounting system software and related maintenance in connection with the implementation of our information technology, or IT, initiatives. Payments under the financing agreements are due quarterly through July 2005. The interest imputed on the payment plan agreement ranges from 4% to 5.3%.

Letters of Credit. Letters of credit are purchased guarantees that assure our performance or payment to third parties in connection with professional liability insurance policies, lease commitments and other potential obligations. Letters of credit commitments totaled $17 million and $18 million at March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. As of March 31, 2004, our letters of credit commitments were backed by funds deposited in restricted cash accounts.

Information Technology Outsourcing Contracts. In December 2001, we entered into a 10-year contract to outsource our IT operations to International Business Machines Corporation, or IBM. Under the contract, IBM is the coordinator of our IT outsourcing arrangement, and provides IT services and day-to-day management of our IT infrastructure, including data center operations, support services and information distribution. In January 2002, we entered into a 10-year contract to outsource our IT software applications maintenance and enhancement services to Keane, Inc., or Keane. Our remaining cash obligations for base fees under these contracts over the initial 10-year terms is $1.1 billion, assuming our actual use of services equals the baselines specified in the contracts. However, because we have the ability to reduce services from the vendors under the

8

Table of Contents

contracts, our ultimate cash commitment may be less than the stated contract amounts. The contracts also provide for variable fees, based on services provided above certain contractual baselines. Additionally, in the event of contract termination, we may be responsible to pay termination fees to IBM and Keane. These termination fees decline as each successive year of the contract term is completed.

Stock Split. On December 19, 2003, our board of directors approved a two-for-one split of our common stock in the form of a stock dividend. On January 20, 2004, we distributed one additional share of common stock for every share of common stock outstanding to stockholders of record as of the close of business on January 7, 2004. The par value of our common stock after the split remained at $0.01 per share. The rights of the holders of these securities were not otherwise modified. In accordance with SFAS 128, Earnings per Share, all shares, per share and market price data related to our common shares outstanding and under employee stock plans reflect the retroactive effects of this two-for-one stock split in the form of a dividend.

Restricted Stock Awards. For the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, we granted 783,400 and 1,388,000 shares of restricted common stock, respectively, including stock deferred into restricted stock units, as part of an employee recognition and retention program. Restrictions on these shares will expire and related charges are being amortized as earned over the vesting period of up to four years. A total of approximately 35,100 shares were forfeited during the first quarter of 2004 and none were forfeited in the same period of 2003.

All shares of restricted stock were issued from our 1996 Officer and Key Employee Stock Option Plan, as amended. The amount of unearned compensation recorded is based on the market value of the shares on the date of issuance and is included as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. Expenses related to the vesting of restricted stock (charged to selling, general and administrative expenses) were $2.0 million and $1.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Effective January 1, 2002, we adopted SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. Under the new rule, goodwill is no longer amortized, but is subject to impairment tests on an annual basis or more frequently if impairment indicators exist. Under the guidance of SFAS No. 142, we use a discounted cash flow methodology to assess the fair values of our reporting units. Impairment is measured by comparing the goodwill derived from the hypothetical purchase price allocation to the carrying value of the goodwill balance. No goodwill impairment indicators existed for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and, as a result, impairment testing was not required.

9

Table of Contents

Other intangible assets are being amortized over their useful lives. We estimate our intangible asset amortization will be $20 million in 2004, $16 million in 2005, $15 million in 2006, $15 million in 2007 and $14 million in 2008. The following sets forth balances of identified intangible assets, by major class, for the periods indicated:

The following table presents the components of total health care services and other expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003:

Provider Instability and Insolvency. Our health care services and other expenses include write-offs of certain uncollectible receivables from providers, and the estimated cost of unpaid health care claims normally covered by our capitation payments. Depending on state law, we may be held liable for unpaid health care claims that were previously the responsibility of the capitated provider and for which we have already paid capitation. Insolvency reserves also include estimates for potentially insolvent providers that we have specifically identified, where conditions indicate claims are not being paid or claim payments have slowed considerably, and we have determined that it is probable that we will be required to make the providers’ claim payments. We continue to monitor the financial condition of our providers where there is perceived risk of insolvency and adjust our insolvency reserves as necessary. Information provided by provider groups may be unaudited, self-reported information or may not ultimately be obtained. The balance of our insolvency reserves included in medical claims and benefits payable totaled $46 million at March 31, 2004 and $37 million at December 31, 2003.

To reduce insolvency risk, we have developed contingency plans that include shifting members to other providers and reviewing operational and financial plans to monitor and maximize financial and network stability. As capitation contracts are renewed for providers we have also taken steps, where feasible, to have security reserves established for insolvency issues. Security reserves are most frequently in the forms of letters of credit or segregated funds that are held in the provider’s name in a third party financial institution. The reserves may be used to pay claims that are the financial responsibility of the provider.

10

Table of Contents

In Re Managed Care. In mid-2000, various federal actions against managed care companies, including us, were joined in a multi-district litigation that was coordinated for pretrial proceedings in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This litigation is known as “In re Managed Care Litigation.” Thereafter, Dr. Dennis Breen, Dr. Leonard Klay, Dr. Jeffrey Book and several other physicians, along with several medical associations, including the California Medical Association, joined the “In re Managed Care” proceeding as plaintiffs. These physicians sued several managed care companies, including us, alleging, among other things, that the companies have systematically underpaid providers for medical services to members, have delayed payments, and that the companies impose unfair contracting terms on providers and negotiate capitation payments that are inadequate to cover the costs of health care services provided.

We sought to compel arbitration of all of Dr. Breen’s, Dr. Book’s and other physician claims against us. The District Court granted our motion to compel arbitration against all of these claims except for claims for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO (“Direct RICO Claims”), and for their RICO conspiracy and aiding and abetting claims that stem from contractual relationships with other managed care companies. On April 7, 2003, the United States Supreme Court held that the District Court should have compelled arbitration of the Direct RICO Claims filed by Dr. Breen and Dr. Book. On September 15, 2003, the District Court entered another ruling on several of our motions to compel arbitration, ordering arbitration of all claims arising out of our contracts with plaintiffs containing arbitration clauses. The District Court, however, also ruled that (a) plaintiffs’ RICO conspiracy and aiding and abetting claims against us that stem from contractual relationships with other managed care companies and (b) plaintiffs’ claims based on services they provided to our members outside of any contractual relationship with us or assignments from our members do not arise out of our contracts with plaintiffs and thus do not need to be arbitrated. As a result, the order to compel arbitration does not cover any claims that may arise relating to our non-contracted providers. We have filed an appeal from the District Court’s ruling to the extent it did not compel arbitration of all of plaintiffs’ claims, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is scheduled to hear oral argument on the appeal on August 12, 2004.

On September 26, 2002, the District Court certified a class action of physicians in the “In re Managed Care Litigation.” On November 20, 2002, the Court of Appeals granted our petition to appeal the class certification by the District Court. Oral argument for this appeal was held on September 11, 2003 and the Court of Appeals has not issued an opinion as of the date of this report. Discovery in this litigation is currently ongoing. We deny all material allegations and intend to defend the action vigorously.

Several additional lawsuits have been filed against us and the other defendants in the “In re Managed Care Litigation” by non-physician providers of health care services, such as chiropractors and podiatrists. Those lawsuits have been assigned to the District Court for pretrial proceedings, but are currently stayed while discovery continues in the physician class action.

PacifiCare of Texas v. The Texas Department of Insurance and the State of Texas. In November 2001, our Texas subsidiary, PacifiCare of Texas, filed a lawsuit against the Texas Department of Insurance, or TDI, and the State of Texas challenging the TDI’s interpretation and enforcement of state statutes and regulations that would make Texas a “double-pay” state. The lawsuit relates to the financial insolvency of three physician groups that had capitation contracts with PacifiCare of Texas. Under these contracts, the responsibility for claims payments to health care providers was delegated to the contracted physician groups. We made capitation payments to each of these physician groups, but they failed to pay all of the health care providers who provided health care services covered by the capitation payments. On February 11, 2002, after the date we filed our lawsuit, the Attorney General of Texas, or AG, on behalf of the State of Texas and the TDI, filed a civil complaint against PacifiCare of Texas in the District Court of Travis County, Texas alleging violations of the Texas Health Maintenance Organization Act, Texas Insurance Code and regulations under the Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Consumer Protection Act. The AG’s complaint primarily alleges that despite its capitation payments to the physician groups, PacifiCare of Texas is still financially responsible for the failure of the physician groups to pay the health care providers who provided health care services covered by the

11

Table of Contents

capitation payments. The AG sought an injunction requiring us to comply with state laws plus unspecified damages, civil penalties and restitution.

On July 23, 2003, without the admission of any wrongdoing, our Texas subsidiary entered into a definitive settlement agreement with the State of Texas, the AG and the TDI. The settlement agreement provides that all pending litigation and related civil investigations will be stayed for up to twelve months from the date of execution of the settlement agreement or such additional period as the parties may mutually agree. While the proceedings are stayed, the parties will seek to settle the provider creditor claims in the remaining outstanding bankruptcies relating to Medical Select Management and Heritage Southwest Medical Group and engage in a review of provider claims of the Heritage Physicians Network, or HPN. We agreed to use our reasonable best efforts to reach settlements in the bankruptcies and resolve the HPN claims by specified dates and agreed to make contributions to fund provider creditor claims in the bankruptcies subject to the process set forth in the definitive settlement agreement.

As part of the settlement, we agreed to make payments totaling $4.25 million, including attorneys fees totaling $1.25 million to the AG, and administrative services reimbursements totaling $1.5 million and administrative penalties totaling $1.5 million to the TDI. Of the $4.25 million payment, $2.45 million was paid in July 2003, and the remaining $1.8 million will be paid upon the satisfaction of the conditions for the settlement. All amounts paid upon execution of the settlement agreement will be held in trust pending the effectiveness of the settlement. The settlement will become effective upon us completing settlements in the two bankruptcies in accordance with the settlement agreement, timely completion of the HPN claims process, payment of all settlement amounts to the AG and TDI, and compliance with certain Texas prompt payment obligations with respect to members enrolled in our commercial HMO plans. Concurrent with the settlement becoming effective: (i) the parties would enter into a permanent injunction with a term of one year that will require PacifiCare of Texas to comply with applicable provisions of the Texas prompt payment obligations with respect to members enrolled in our commercial HMO plans; (ii) all of the pending litigation between the parties will be dismissed with prejudice or with specified final judgments; and (iii) the parties will enter into mutual releases. We cannot provide any assurances that we will be able to meet the conditions required to cause the settlement to become effective. If the settlement agreement does not become effective, then we are prepared to resume the litigation. We believe that recorded liabilities for this matter are adequate, including the satisfaction of all the terms and conditions of the settlement, or any liabilities that may arise if we are required to resume the litigation.

Irwin v. AdvancePCS, Inc. et al. On March 26, 2003, Robert Irwin filed a complaint in the California Superior Court of Alameda County, California, against our PBM company, Prescription Solutions, as well as nine other PBM companies. On July 17, 2003, the Irwin case was coordinated with American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. AdvancedPCS, et al, and transferred to Los Angeles Superior Court for coordinated proceedings. The case purports to be filed on behalf of members of non-ERISA health plans and individuals with no prescription drug coverage who have purchased drugs at retail rates. The first amended complaint, filed on November 25, 2003, alleges that each of the defendants violated California’s unfair competition law. The complaint challenges alleged business practices of PBMs, including practices relating to pricing, rebates, formulary management, data utilization and accounting and administrative processes. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and injunctive relief. Prescription Solutions intends to file a petition to compel arbitration, which is scheduled to be heard by the Superior Court on June 2, 2004. Discovery is proceeding against most other defendants but is stayed as to Prescription Solutions pending the motion to compel arbitration. We deny all material allegations and intend to defend the action vigorously.

Other Litigation. We are involved in various legal actions in the normal course of business, including claims from our members and providers arising out of decisions to deny or restrict reimbursement for services and claims that seek monetary damages, including claims for punitive damages that are not covered by insurance. Our establishment of drug formularies, support of clinical trials and PBM services may increase our exposure to product liability claims associated with pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Based on current information, including consultation with our lawyers, we believe any ultimate liability that may arise from these actions,

12

Table of Contents

including the In re Managed Care litigation, would not materially affect our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, our evaluation of the likely impact of these actions could change in the future and an unfavorable outcome, depending upon the amount and timing, could have a material effect on our results of operations or cash flows of a future period. For example, the loss of even one claim resulting in a significant punitive damage award could have a material adverse effect on our business. Moreover, our exposure to potential liability under punitive damage theories may decrease significantly our ability to settle these claims on reasonable terms.

8.     Earnings Per Share

The following table includes a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators for the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share. All share and per share amounts reflect the retroactive effects of the two-for-one common stock split in the form of a stock dividend that was effective January 20, 2004. See Note 4 “Stockholders’ Equity”.

(1)	Excludes 1,030,000 and 1,582,000 shares of restricted common stock which have been granted under our stock-based compensation plans but have not vested as of March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
(2)	Certain options to purchase common stock were not included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their exercise prices were greater than the average market price of our common stock for the periods presented. For the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, these excluded weighted options outstanding totaled 1.7 million shares and 7.7 million shares, respectively, with exercise prices ranging from $12.63 to $46.25 per share. For the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, the average market value used in the computation of dilutive employee stock options and other dilutive potential common shares was $34.48 and $12.58, respectively.

13

Table of Contents

Comprehensive income represents our net income plus changes in equity, other than those changes resulting from investments by, and distributions to, our stockholders. Such changes include unrealized gains or losses on our available-for-sale securities. Our comprehensive income totaled $74 million and $69 million for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Certain of our domestic, unregulated subsidiaries, which we refer to as the Initial Guarantor Subsidiaries and certain subsidiaries of PacifiCare Health Plan Administrators, Inc., or PHPA, which we refer to as the PHPA Guarantor Subsidiaries, fully and unconditionally guarantee the 10 3/4% senior notes. Prior to September 15, 2003, the PHPA Guarantor Subsidiaries were restricted from guaranteeing the 10 3/4% senior notes by the terms of the FHP senior notes. As the FHP senior notes were repaid in full on September 15, 2003, these subsidiaries now fully and unconditionally guarantee the 10 3/4% senior notes. The Initial Guarantor Subsidiaries and the PHPA Guarantor Subsidiaries are collectively referred to as the Guarantor Subsidiaries.

The Guarantor Subsidiaries, excluding MEDeMORPHUS Healthcare Solutions, Inc., are also guarantors of our senior credit facility. The following unaudited consolidating condensed financial statements quantify the financial position as of March 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 and the operations and cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003 of the Guarantor Subsidiaries listed below. The following unaudited consolidating condensed balance sheets, consolidating condensed statements of income and consolidating condensed statements of cash flows present financial information for the following entities and utilizing the following adjustments:

Parent — PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. on a stand-alone basis (carrying investments in subsidiaries under the equity method); PacifiCare became the parent on February 14, 1997 effective with the acquisition of FHP.

Guarantor Subsidiaries — PHPA, PacifiCare eHoldings, Inc., SeniorCo, Inc., MEDeMORPHUS Healthcare Solutions, Inc. on a stand-alone basis (carrying investments in subsidiaries under the equity method), RxSolutions, Inc., doing business as Prescription Solutions, PacifiCare Behavioral Health, Inc., and SecureHorizons USA, Inc. on a stand-alone basis.

Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries — Represents all other directly or indirectly wholly owned subsidiaries of the Parent on a condensed consolidated basis.

Consolidating Adjustments — Entries that eliminate the investment in subsidiaries and intercompany balances and transactions.

The Company — The financial information for PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. on a condensed consolidated basis.

Provision For Income Taxes — PacifiCare and its subsidiaries record the provision for income taxes in accordance with an intercompany tax-sharing agreement. Income tax benefits available to subsidiaries that arise from net operating losses can only be used to offset the subsidiaries’ taxable income from prior years in accordance with the Federal Tax Law and taxable income in future periods.

14

Table of Contents

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEETS