Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For The Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2004

Commission File Number 000-50940

ROTECH HEALTHCARE INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(407) 822-4600

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.0001 par value per share

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 ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the 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.    x

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

As of June 30, 2004, the aggregate market value of the common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $616,526,158. The determination of stock ownership by non-affiliates is based upon the registrant’s knowledge of stock ownership as of June 30, 2004 and is made solely for purposes of responding to the requirements of the form and the registrant is not bound by this determination for any other purpose. As of June 30, 2004, the registrant did not have any securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) or 12(g) of the Act and, therefore, has only limited knowledge of the common equity held by stockholders who may be deemed affiliates at that time. The aggregate market value is based upon the closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock of $24.50, as reported by the Pink Sheets LLC on June 30, 2004.

As of March 18, 2005, the registrant had 25,376,995 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The information called for by Part III, to the extent not provided therein or elsewhere in this report, is incorporated by reference to the Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the registrant which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after December 31, 2004.

Table of Contents

ROTECH HEALTHCARE INC.

Form 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2004

Index

i

Table of Contents

INFORMATION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This report contains certain statements that constitute forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include all statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations regarding the matters discussed in this report (including statements as to “beliefs,” “expectations,” “anticipations,” “intentions” or similar words) and all statements which are not statements of historical fact. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, contingencies and other factors that could cause results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those stated in this report. The following are some but not all of such risks, uncertainties, contingencies, assumptions and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, that could cause results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those anticipated: general economic, financial and business conditions; issues relating to reimbursement by government and third party payors for our products and services; the costs associated with government regulation of the health care industry; the effects of competition and industry consolidation; the costs and effects of legal proceedings; and other risks and uncertainties described under “Risk Factors.” In the event that we seek a listing for our common stock on a securities exchange or automated quotation system, there can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such a listing. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, such forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date thereof. When you consider these forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind these risk factors and other cautionary statements in this report, including in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, “Business” and “Market for Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.” We do not undertake any obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

2

Table of Contents

PART I

Rotech Healthcare Inc. was established upon the transfer to us of substantially all of the assets of our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation, when it emerged from bankruptcy on March 26, 2002. The financial statements included herein reflect these transactions effective as of March 31, 2002. As a result, references to “we”, “our”, and “us” refer to the operations of Rotech Healthcare Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries for all periods subsequent to March 31, 2002 and the business and operations of our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation, a Florida corporation, and its subsidiaries for all periods prior to April 1, 2002. Financial data for the year-ended December 31, 2002 have been presented for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and the nine months ended December 31, 2002, rather than for the year-ended December 31, 2002, because we had only nine months of operating results since our predecessor emerged from bankruptcy in such fiscal year. In connection with our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy, we reflected the terms of the plan of reorganization in our consolidated financial statements by adopting the fresh-start reporting provisions of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position 90-7, “Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the Bankruptcy Code”. Under fresh-start reporting, a new reporting entity is deemed to be created and the recorded amounts of assets and liabilities are adjusted to reflect their estimated fair values. For accounting purposes, the fresh-start adjustments have been reflected in the operating results of our predecessor for the three months ended March 31, 2002.

ITEM 1.    BUSINESS

We are one of the largest providers of home medical equipment and related products and services in the United States, with a comprehensive offering of respiratory therapy and durable home medical equipment and related services. We provide equipment and services in 48 states through approximately 475 operating centers located primarily in non-urban markets. We provide our equipment and services principally to older patients with breathing disorders, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, or COPD (which include chronic bronchitis and emphysema), obstructive sleep apnea and other cardiopulmonary disorders.

Our revenues are principally derived from respiratory equipment rental and related services (86.6% of net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004), which include rental of oxygen concentrators, liquid oxygen systems, portable oxygen systems, ventilator therapy systems, nebulizer equipment and sleep disorder breathing therapy systems, and the sale of nebulizer medications. We also generate revenues through the rental and sale of durable medical equipment (12.4% of net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004), including hospital beds, wheelchairs, walkers, patient aids and ancillary supplies. We derive a majority of our revenues from reimbursement by third-party payors, including Medicare, Medicaid, the Veterans Administration (VA) and private insurers.

For the year ended December 31, 2004, we generated net revenues of $534.5 million and net earnings of $38.2 million. For the same period, net cash provided by operating activities was $134.0 million and net cash used in investing activities and net cash used in financing activities were $54.0 million and $36.1 million, respectively. Earnings from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $177.4 million. See “Selected Financial Data,” item (6) on page 37 for a detailed definition of EBITDA.

Our Service Lines

Respiratory Therapy

We provide a range of respiratory therapy equipment, including oxygen concentrators, liquid oxygen systems, portable oxygen systems, ventilator therapy systems, nebulizer equipment, and sleep disorder breathing therapy systems, for rental or sale. Patients in need of respiratory equipment and services suffer from breathing disorders, such as COPD, obstructive sleep apnea and other cardiopulmonary disorders. Individuals diagnosed with COPD or similar diseases are often elderly, and generally will require treatment for the rest of their lives.

3

Table of Contents

The majority of our respiratory therapy equipment is rented and reimbursed on a monthly basis. We also generate revenue from the sale of inhalation medications, including albuterol and ipratropium. We provide driver technicians who deliver and/or install the respiratory care equipment, instruct the patient in its use, refill the high pressure and liquid oxygen systems as necessary and provide continuing maintenance of the equipment. Respiratory therapy is monitored by licensed respiratory therapists and other clinical staff as prescribed by physicians. We currently employ approximately 451 full time respiratory therapists. Respiratory therapy equipment rental and related services represented 86.6% of our net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Our home respiratory care equipment includes three types of oxygen systems:

Other home respiratory care equipment includes non-invasive positive pressure ventilators (NPPV), nebulizer devices, bilevel positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) devices. NPPVs are used by individuals who suffer from certain other respiratory conditions by mechanically assisting the individual to breathe. Nebulizer devices aerosolize our nebulizer medications and allow the medications to be inhaled directly into the patient’s lungs. CPAP devices deliver pressure into a patient’s airway through a specially designed nasal mask or pillow to prevent airway collapse during sleep.

Durable Medical Equipment

We provide a comprehensive line of durable medical equipment, such as hospital beds, wheelchairs, walkers, patient aids and other ancillary supplies, for rental or sale, to serve the specific needs of our patients. Typically, lower cost items, such as patient aids and walkers, are sold and higher cost items, such as hospital beds and wheelchairs, are rented. We consider durable medical equipment to be a complementary offering to respiratory therapy equipment and related services.

Our Operations

Organization

We have approximately 475 operating centers, which now operate through three divisions. Each of these divisions is managed by a team of division managers who provide management services to our operating centers in four service categories: operations, sales, billing and collection and clinical. These managers provide key support services to our operating centers, including billing, purchasing, equipment maintenance and repair and warehousing. Each operating center delivers equipment and services to patients in their homes and other care sites through the operating center’s delivery fleet and qualified personnel. Operational control, purchasing and operating policies for our divisions are administered centrally at our principal offices in Orlando, Florida through our Chief Operating Officer, clinical functions are administered through our Chief Clinical Officer who reports to our Chief Operating Officer, while sales functions are administered through our Chief Sales Officer, and financial control, billing and collection services are provided through our Chief Financial Officer. We believe that this management structure provides control and consistency among our divisions and operating centers and allows us to implement standard policies and procedures across a large number of geographically remote operating centers.

Operating Systems and Controls

Our operating systems provide management with information to measure and evaluate key components of our operations. We have a proprietary billing system that is scalable and is used for substantially all of our billing

4

Table of Contents

sources, including Medicare, our largest source of revenues. All Medicare claims are aggregated, processed, archived and transmitted to Medicare on a daily basis. The process is highly automated and has proven to be reliable and cost-effective.

Our billing and collection departments work closely with personnel at operating center locations and third-party payors and are responsible for the review of patient coverage, the adequacy and timeliness of documentation and the follow-up with third-party payors to expedite reimbursement payments. We communicate with our operating centers through an intranet-based system that provides our managers with detailed information that allows us to address operating efficiencies. We believe this reporting capability allows our managers to operate their businesses more effectively and allocate their resources more appropriately.

We will continue to improve our operating efficiencies in order to position ourselves for future growth by utilizing our proprietary information technology platform, as well as third-party software products, to improve our billing, compliance and inventory systems. In 2004, we reduced the number of billing centers from 13 to 11. We will continue to review the number of billing centers in 2005. The reduction of billing centers allows for increased control with fewer individuals administering the process, reduces our lease costs and facilitates the further implementation of compliance controls. In addition, we are continuing to develop our information technology platform that we use to track inventory on a store-by-store basis. We believe that this may help to analyze whether our inventory is being used at its most efficient levels by tracking the useful life, maintenance and location of the equipment at all times.

Payors

We derive the majority of our revenues from reimbursement by third party payors. We accept assignment of insurance benefits from patients and, in most instances, invoice and collect payments directly from Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance carriers, as well as directly from patients under co-insurance provisions. The following table sets forth our payor mix:

We contract with insurers and managed care entities on a local, regional and national basis. We generally contract with those insurers and managed care entities having a significant patient population in the areas served by us, typically on a fee-for-service basis. We have not historically contracted with insurers or managed care entities on a national basis, however, we are currently a party to a service agreement with a national managed care company and are pursuing additional managed care relationships on a national level. Pursuant to our contracts with the Veterans Administration (VA), we provide equipment and services to persons eligible for VA benefits in the regions covered by the contracts. The VA contracts typically provide for an annual term, subject to four or five one-year renewal periods unless terminated or not renewed by the VA.

Our Company History

Rotech Healthcare Inc. was incorporated in the State of Delaware on March 15, 2002. Rotech Medical Corporation, our predecessor, was founded in 1981. In October 1997, Rotech Medical Corporation was acquired

5

Table of Contents

by Integrated Health Services, Inc. (IHS), a large, publicly-held provider of post-acute and related specialty health care services and products. Following the acquisition, Rotech Medical Corporation operated as a wholly-owned subsidiary of IHS. On February 2, 2000, IHS and substantially all of its subsidiaries, including Rotech Medical Corporation filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code with the United States Bankruptcy Court in the District of Delaware. The principal reason for the commencement of Rotech Medical Corporation’s Chapter 11 case was that Rotech Medical Corporation had jointly guaranteed approximately $2.3 billion of obligations of IHS, under credit agreements with IHS’ senior creditors. IHS defaulted on its obligations under those agreements in 1999. Rotech Medical Corporation’s plan of reorganization was confirmed on February 13, 2002 (and became final on February 25, 2002) and became effective on March 26, 2002. As a result of the reorganization, substantially all of Rotech Medical Corporation’s assets, business and operations were transferred to us, an independent company. On December 20, 2004, the Bankruptcy Court entered a final decree closing Rotech Medical Corporation’s bankruptcy case.

Senior Secured Credit Facilities

On March 26, 2002, we entered into senior secured credit facilities for up to $275 million, with UBS Warburg LLC and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., as arrangers, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners, L.P., as syndication agent, UBS AG, Stamford Branch, as administrative agent, and a syndicate of other financial institutions. The senior secured credit facilities consist of:

The amount available for borrowings under the revolving credit facility is the lesser of (a) the total commitment amount of the revolving credit facility minus the aggregate outstanding balance of revolving credit loans (including obligations in respect of letters of credit) and (b) certain percentages of our and our domestic subsidiaries’ eligible accounts receivable, eligible inventory and eligible property, plant and equipment, minus the aggregate outstanding balance of revolving credit loans (including obligations in respect of letters of credit) and the term loans.

The term loan was drawn in full on the consummation of our predecessor’s plan of reorganization, which occurred contemporaneously with the sale of our 9½% senior subordinated notes due 2012. The term loan is amortized with 1% of the term loan payable in each of the first five years and 95% of the initial aggregate term loan to be payable in year six, 2008. During the first quarter of 2004, we made payments on our term loan in the amount of $25.3 million. In August 2004, we repurchased $13 million of our 9½% senior subordinated notes and paid a premium of $0.9 million associated with the retirement of such notes. At December 31, 2004, the revolving credit facility had not been drawn upon, although standby letters of credit totaling $11.2 million have been issued under this credit facility.

Interest rates and fees

The interest rates per annum applicable to the senior secured credit facilities is LIBOR or, at our option, the alternate base rate, which is the higher of (a) the rate of interest publicly announced by UBS AG as its prime rate in effect at its Stamford Branch, and (b) the federal funds effective rate from time to time plus 0.50%, in each case, plus the applicable margin (as defined below). The applicable margin (a) with respect to the revolving credit facility, is determined in accordance with a performance grid based on our consolidated leverage ratio and ranges from 3.25% to 2.25% in the case of Eurodollar rate advances and from 2.25% to 1.25% in the case of alternate base rate advances, and (b) with respect to the term loan facility, is 3.00% in the case of Eurodollar rate advances and 2.00% in the case of alternate base rate advances. The default rate on the senior secured credit facilities is 2.00% above the otherwise applicable interest rate. We are also obligated to pay a commitment fee ranging, depending on usage, from 0.75% to 0.50% on the unused portion of our revolving credit facility.

Covenants

The senior secured credit facilities contain customary affirmative and negative covenants, including, without limitation, limitations on indebtedness; limitations on liens; limitations on guarantee obligations; limitations on

6

Table of Contents

mergers, consolidations, liquidations and dissolutions; limitations on sales of assets; limitations on leases; limitations on dividends and other payments in respect of capital stock; limitations on investments, loans and advances; limitations on capital expenditures; limitations on optional payments and modifications of subordinated and other debt instruments; limitations on transactions with affiliates; limitations on granting negative pledges; and limitations on changes in lines of business. Our senior secured credit facilities also contain customary financial covenants including, maintenance of the following ratios: (a) a consolidated total leverage ratio, (b) a consolidated senior leverage ratio, (c) a consolidated interest coverage ratio and (d) a consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio.

Security and guarantees

Our obligations under the credit facilities are guaranteed by each of our direct and indirect domestic subsidiaries, excluding specified immaterial subsidiaries. All obligations under the credit facilities and the guarantees are secured by a perfected first priority security interest in substantially all of our tangible and intangible assets, including intellectual property, real property and all of the capital stock of each of our direct and indirect subsidiaries, excluding immaterial subsidiaries in the process of dissolution and other specified immaterial subsidiaries and limited, in the case of each foreign subsidiary, to 65% of the value of the stock of such entity.

Senior Subordinated Notes

In March 2002, we issued an aggregate principal amount of $300 million of 9½% senior subordinated notes due 2012 and received net proceeds of approximately $290 million, after deducting the initial purchasers’ discount and our estimated expenses. We distributed the net proceeds from the sale of the notes to our predecessor as partial consideration in exchange for substantially all of the assets used in connection with its business and operations as part of the restructuring and related transactions involving our predecessor and us. Subsequently, our predecessor distributed the net proceeds to its former creditors as provided in its plan of reorganization. We did not retain any of the proceeds from the sale of the notes for use in our business.

Government Regulation

The health care industry is subject to extensive regulation by a number of governmental entities at the federal, state and local levels. The industry is also subject to frequent regulatory changes. Our business is impacted not only by those laws and regulations that are directly applicable to us, but also by certain laws and regulations that are applicable to our managed care and other patients. State laws also govern, among other things, pharmacies, nursing services, distribution of medical equipment and certain types of home health activities and apply to those locations involved in such activities. Certain of our employees are subject to state laws and regulations governing the ethics and professional practice of respiratory therapy, pharmacy and nursing. If we fail to comply with the laws and regulations applicable to our business, we could suffer civil and/or criminal penalties and we could be excluded from participating in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state health care programs.

The federal government has made a policy decision to significantly increase the financial resources allocated to enforcing the health care fraud and abuse laws. Private insurers and various state enforcement agencies also have increased their level of scrutiny of health care claims in an effort to identify and prosecute fraudulent and abusive practices in the health care area.

Medicare and Medicaid Reimbursement. As part of the Social Security Amendments of 1965, Congress enacted the Medicare program which provides for hospital, physician and other statutorily-defined health benefits for qualified individuals, including persons over 65 and the disabled. The Medicaid program, also established by Congress in 1965, is a joint federal and state program that provides certain statutorily-defined health benefits to financially needy individuals who are blind, disabled, aged or members of families with dependent children. In

7

Table of Contents

addition, Medicaid may cover financially needy children, refugees and pregnant women. In 2004, Medicare, Medicaid and other federally funded programs (primarily Veterans Administration contracts) accounted for approximately 71.0% of our revenues.

Medicare Laws and Regulations. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, or BBA 97, granted authority to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, or DHHS, to increase or reduce the reimbursement for home medical equipment, including oxygen, by 15% each year under an inherent reasonableness procedure. On February 11, 2003, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, made effective an interim final rule implementing the inherent reasonableness authority, which allows the agency and carriers to adjust payment amounts by up to 15% per year for certain items and services covered by Part B when the existing payment amount is determined to be grossly excessive or deficient. The regulation lists factors that may be used by CMS and the carriers to determine whether an existing reimbursement rate is grossly excessive or deficient and to determine what is a realistic and equitable payment amount. Also, under the regulation, CMS and the carriers will not consider a payment amount to be grossly excessive or deficient and make an adjustment if they determine that an overall payment adjustment of less than 15% is necessary to produce a realistic and equitable payment amount. In addition to its inherent reasonableness authority, CMS has the discretion to reduce the reimbursement for home medical equipment, or HME and other non-HME services to an amount based on the payment amount for the least costly alternative treatment that meets the Medicare beneficiary’s medical needs. Least costly alternative, or LCA, determinations are applied to particular products and services by CMS and its carriers through the informal notice and comment process used in establishing local coverage policies for HME. This process need not be followed for LCA determinations made on individual claims. Using either its inherent reasonableness or least costly alternative authority, CMS and the carriers may reduce reimbursement levels for certain items and services covered by Part B, including products and services we offer, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

On December 8, 2003, the President signed into law the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA. The MMA significantly changes how Medicare Part B pays for our products, including HME items, such as oxygen, oxygen equipment and nebulizers, as well as inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers, in the following ways:

(1) Reductions and Payment Freeze for HME. Currently, Medicare payments to us for our HME products are based on the lesser of the actual charge for the item or the applicable Medicare fee schedule amount. Under MMA, from 2004 through 2008, most payments for HME are set at the 2003 level and therefore, are “frozen,” unless the item becomes subject to further reductions based on Federal Health Benefits Program median payment amounts as described below, or are subject to competitive bidding. As of January 1, 2005, the fee schedule amounts for certain items of HME, including wheelchairs and nebulizers, were further reduced, based on the percentage difference between the amount of payment otherwise determined for 2002 and the median amount of payment under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, or FEHBP, as determined by the Office of Inspector General of DHHS, or OIG. The FEHBP adjusted payments are to remain “frozen” through 2008 unless the particular item becomes subject to competitive bidding.

The fee schedule amounts for oxygen and oxygen equipment are also to be calculated using this methodology. A September 2004 OIG report entitled “Medicare Payment Rates for Home Oxygen Equipment” surveyed FEHBP prices for oxygen equipment and found that the median 2002 prices were considerably lower than Medicare payments for those items. According to the report, the 2002 median FEHBP payments for five oxygen codes showed that the FEHBP median payments for stationary home oxygen equipment were approximately 15.5% less than Medicare payments for stationary home oxygen equipment and approximately 11.3% less than Medicare payments for portable home oxygen equipment. On February 4, 2005, CMS published notice CMS-1299-N announcing a delay in the implementation of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates. The notice states that CMS was informed by the OIG that it will need to collect additional information before the FEHBP median prices for oxygen are finalized. Until such prices are established, Medicare claims for oxygen equipment furnished on or after January 1, 2005 will be paid based on the 2004 monthly payment amounts. CMS is expected to calculate and implement the lower 2005

8

Table of Contents

payment amounts upon receipt of the additional information from the OIG. CMS has stated that no retroactive adjustments are to be made once the new payment amounts are set. Reductions in payment rates for 2005 established by CMS for the non-oxygen HME items subject to the FEHBP provisions range between 4% and 16%. The non-oxygen HME items subject to the Medicare price cuts accounted for approximately 2% of our recorded revenues in 2004. If the proposed reductions in the Medicare fee schedules for home oxygen equipment (as set forth in the September 2004 OIG report discussed above) together with the additional reimbursement reductions mandated by the MMA in 2005 for other home medical equipment (excluding inhalation drugs) had been implemented in 2004, we believe it would have resulted in a reduction in our 2004 recorded revenues in the range of approximately $30 million to $35 million. At this time, we cannot determine the outcome of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates, the date on which the new payment amounts will become effective or the ultimate impact on our business.

(2) Implementation of Competitive Bidding for HME. Starting in 2007, Medicare will begin to phase in a nationwide competitive bidding program to replace the existing fee schedule payment methodology. The program will begin in 10 high-population metropolitan service areas, or MSAs, expanding to 80 MSAs in 2009 and additional areas thereafter. Under competitive bidding, suppliers compete for the right to provide items to beneficiaries in a defined region. Only a limited number of suppliers will be selected in any given MSA, resulting in restricted supplier choices for beneficiaries. MMA permits certain exemptions from competitive bidding, including exemptions for rural areas and areas with low population density within urban areas that are not competitive, unless there is a significant national market through mail-order for the particular item. A large number of our facilities are located in such areas. However, the criteria for how the exemption will be applied have not yet been determined. Therefore, the impact on our business is uncertain. Also, MMA requires that contracts may only be awarded to suppliers that meet certain quality and financial standards and that the amounts paid to suppliers under the contracts must be less than the amount paid under the current system. Beginning in 2009, CMS may use information on payments from the competitive bidding program to adjust payments in regions not subject to competitive bidding. The proposed regulations implementing the competitive bidding program are expected to be published in the summer of 2005 and finalized by the summer of 2006. The inherent reasonableness interim final regulation (see above) remains in effect after MMA, but the legislation precludes the use of inherent reasonableness authority for devices subject to competitive bidding. At this time, we do not know which of our products will be subject to inherent reasonableness and/or competitive bidding, nor can we predict the impact that inherent reasonableness and competitive bidding will have on our business.

(3) Reduction in Payments for Inhalation Drugs. MMA also revises the payment methodology for certain drugs, including inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers. Prior to MMA, Medicare paid for these drugs based on average wholesale price, or AWP, as reported by drug manufacturers. Beginning January 1, 2004, Medicare payments were reduced for most of our Part B inhalation drugs to 80% of AWP from 95% of AWP, a reduction of approximately 15 percent. This reduction in Medicare payment rates for inhalation drugs reduced our revenues and operating income by approximately $24 million in 2004. As of January 1, 2005, as required by MMA, payment amounts for most drugs are based on the average sales price, or ASP. Beginning in 2006, payment amounts for most drugs are to be based on either ASP or competitive bidding for drugs administered by physicians. ASP is defined statutorily as the volume weighted average of manufacturers’ average sales prices, calculated by adding the manufacturers’ average sales prices for the drug in the fiscal quarter to the number of units sold and then divided by the total number of units sold for all national drug codes assigned to the product. Under the ASP methodology, Medicare generally will pay 106% of ASP for multiple source drugs and 106% of the lesser of ASP or wholesale acquisition cost for single source drugs. In addition, if the ASP exceeds the widely available market price by more than 5%, CMS may substitute the widely available market price for the ASP. ASP payment rates are calculated using the most recent manufacturer data available. Manufacturer ASP data submissions are due to CMS not later than 30 days after the last day of each calendar quarter. Quarterly updates are to be implemented to reflect these quarterly submissions by manufacturers. Third quarter 2004 data was used to calculate the ASP payment amounts for the first quarter of 2005. ASP payment amounts for our products may fluctuate from quarter to quarter. We cannot predict whether manufacturers’ quarterly data submissions will result in further reductions in payment amounts and what impact such payment reductions would have on our results of operations in 2005 and beyond.

9

Table of Contents

The ASP payment amounts for the first and second quarters of 2005 for many drugs are significantly less than the payment amounts for these drugs in 2004. For example, the payment rates, as posted by CMS, for two prevalent inhalation drugs, albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide, were reduced from $0.39 and $2.82 per milligram in 2004 to $0.065 and $0.287 for the first quarter of 2005, respectively. For the second quarter of 2005, payment rates, as posted by CMS, for albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide were changed to $0.090 and $0.202, respectively. Given the overall reduction in payment for inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers, CMS established a $57 dispensing fee for inhalation drugs shipped to a beneficiary during a 30-day period or $80 for a 90-day period. In calculating these 2005 dispensing fees, CMS took into account data submitted by members of the public as well as an October 2004 report by the United States Government Accountability Office, or GAO, regarding inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers. The GAO recommended that CMS evaluate the costs of dispensing inhalation therapy drugs and modify the existing dispensing fee, if warranted, to ensure that it reflects the costs necessary for dispensation of inhalation therapy drugs. In the FY 2005 physician fee schedule final rule setting the ASP payment amounts and the dispensing fees, CMS noted that there may have been differences in surveyed costs and services between the GAO survey and other survey data submitted by commenters, including the American Association for Homecare. CMS indicated its intent to explore further the variability in costs of furnishing inhalation drugs and the services being provided before making any determination with respect to an appropriate dispensing fee, if any, after 2005, and that the agency intends to proceed through notice and comment rulemaking in order to establish a new dispensing fee, if any, for 2006. We cannot predict the outcome of any future rulemaking by CMS. If the dispensing fees are reduced or eliminated in 2006 or beyond, this could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations.

Medicare-reimbursed inhalation drug therapies provided by us in 2004 accounted for approximately 17% of our recorded revenues. The 2005 dispensing fees offset to some extent the reductions in payment rates for inhalation drugs established under the ASP methodology. While we have been able, based upon the increased dispensing fees, to continue offering inhalation drugs to Medicare patients in 2005, the pricing changes resulting from the ASP payment rates are expected to result in a material reduction in the revenues and profitability of our inhalation drug business and we cannot predict whether it will continue to be economically feasible for us to continue to provide inhalation drugs in the future.

(4) Implementation of Certain Clinical Conditions and Quality Standards. MMA requires that new clinical conditions of coverage be developed for HME, with those products perceived as having a higher utilization to be given priority for implementation. Although not yet implemented, the quality standards are to be developed by CMS and applied by independent accreditation organizations. As an entity that bills Medicare and receives payment from the program, we will be subject to these standards. At this time, we cannot predict the extent of the clinical and quality standards or the full impact they will have on our business.

Professional Licensure

Nurses, pharmacists and other health care professionals employed by us are required to be individually licensed or certified under applicable state law. We take steps to assure that our employees possess all necessary licenses and certifications, and we believe that our employees comply in all material respects with applicable licensure or certification laws.

Pharmacy Licensing and Registration

State laws require that each of our pharmacy locations be licensed as an in-state pharmacy to dispense pharmaceuticals in that state and that companies delivering pharmaceuticals into a particular state be licensed to do so in that state. Most states, and the Federal Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), adopt and enforce the official standards of the US Pharmacopeia (“USP”) as the official compendia of drug standards. State lawmakers regularly propose and, at times, enact new legislation establishing changes in the practice of pharmacy laws and regulations. In addition, the USP is frequently supplemented and amended to create new standards for drugs. We continuously monitor state activities and the USP, but there can be no assurance that we will be able to

10

Table of Contents

immediately comply with all new laws, regulations or standards. We have policies in place that we believe substantially comply with all state licensing and pharmacy laws currently applicable to our business, and we are engaged in activities designed to achieve compliance with these polices. We cannot ensure full compliance at all times, however, as licenses may lapse and laws may change. Many states enforce their pharmacy laws, including the USP, through periodic facility inspections. The FDA generally defers to state pharmacy boards during routine inspections of pharmacies, but will intervene and exercise its enforcement authority if it determines that any of a pharmacy’s activities are more akin to those of a manufacturer or if FDA determines that the public health is at risk. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action, including fines, injunctions, seizures, and civil or criminal penalties. If we are unable to obtain and maintain our licenses in one or more states, or if such states place burdensome restrictions or limitations on pharmacies, our ability to operate in such states would be limited, which could adversely impact our business and results of operations.

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act

Under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FFDCA”), the FDA imposes stringent regulations on the distribution, labeling, and other aspects of our medical gas and pharmacy operations. In particular, the FDA imposes rigorous regulations on medical gas distributors under its current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) requirements. Federal and state laws also require that we follow specific labeling, reporting and record-keeping requirements for pharmaceutical products that we distribute. Federal law exempts many pharmaceuticals and medical devices from federal labeling and packaging requirements so long as they are not adulterated or misbranded and are dispensed in accordance with and pursuant to a valid prescription.

Some of our pharmacists provide compounded preparations of drug products that are not commercially available, based upon a patient’s individual need and at a physician’s specific request. While the FDA asserts that it has jurisdiction over pharmacy compounding, to the extent that compounding practices are considered to be within the practice of pharmacy, however, these activities are regulated primarily under state law. In May 2002, FDA issued a Compliance Policy Guide for Staff and Industry, Section 460.200, setting forth FDA’s enforcement policy on pharmacy compounding. We believe that our compounding activities are consistent with the practice of pharmacy under state law and as provided in the FDA’s Compliance Policy Guide. However, some of the activities that we consider to be compounding, the FDA may consider to constitute the manufacturing of a new drug, because the FDA may define the scope of drug manufacturing activities more broadly than we or the state pharmacy boards do. If FDA determines that our compounding activities are more consistent with the activities of a drug manufacturer, we could be subject to enforcement action.

Claims Audits

Durable medical equipment regional carriers are private organizations that contract to serve as the government’s agents for the processing of certain claims for items and services provided under Part B of the Medicare program. These carriers and Medicaid agencies periodically conduct pre-payment and post-payment reviews and other audits of claims submitted. Medicare and Medicaid agents are under increasing pressure to scrutinize health care claims more closely. In addition, the industry in which we operate is generally characterized by long collection cycles for accounts receivable due to complex and time-consuming documentation and claims processing and other requirements for obtaining reimbursement from private and governmental third-party payors. Such protracted collection cycles can lead to delays in obtaining reimbursement. Furthermore, reviews and/or similar audits or investigations of our claims and related documentation could result in denials of claims for payment submitted by us. The government could demand significant refunds or recoupments of amounts paid by the government for claims which, upon subsequent investigation, are determined by the government to be inadequately supported by the required documentation.

The Anti-Kickback Statute

As a provider of services under the Medicare and Medicaid programs, we are subject to the Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse laws (sometimes referred to as the “Anti-Kickback statute”). At the federal level, the Anti-Kickback statute prohibits any person from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or

11

Table of Contents

providing any remuneration, including a bribe, kickback or rebate, directly or indirectly, in return for or to induce the referral of patients, or the furnishing, recommending, or arranging for products or services covered by federal health care programs. Federal health care programs have been defined to include plans and programs that provide health benefits funded by the federal government, including Medicare and Medicaid, among others. Violations of the Anti-Kickback statute may result in civil and criminal penalties including fines of up to $25,000 per violation, civil monetary penalties of up to $50,000 per violation, assessments of up to three times the amount of the prohibited remuneration, imprisonment, and exclusion from participation in the federal health care programs. The Office of the Inspector General of the DHHS has published regulations that identify a limited number of specific business practices that fall within safe harbors which are deemed not to violate the Anti-Kickback statute. Although we attempt to structure our business relationships to meet safe harbor requirements, it is possible that not all of our business relationships comply with the elements of one or more safe harbors. Conformity with the safe harbors is not mandatory and failure to meet all of the requirements of an applicable safe harbor does not make conduct per se illegal. The Office of Inspector General is authorized to issue advisory opinions regarding the interpretation and applicability of the federal Anti-Kickback statute, including whether an activity constitutes grounds for the imposition of civil or criminal sanctions. We have not, however, sought such an opinion.

In addition, a number of states in which we operate have anti-fraud and anti-kickback laws similar to the Anti-Kickback Statute that prohibit certain direct or indirect payments if such arrangements are designed to induce or encourage the referral of patients or the furnishing of goods or services. Some states’ anti-fraud and anti-kickback laws apply only to goods and services covered by Medicaid. Other states’ anti-fraud and anti-kickback laws apply to all health care goods and services, regardless of whether the source of payment is governmental or private. Further, many states prohibit revenue sharing or fee splitting arrangements between physicians and other third parties. Possible sanctions for violation of these restrictions include exclusion from state-funded health care programs, loss of licensure and civil and criminal penalties. Such statutes vary from state to state, are often vague and have seldom been interpreted by the courts or regulatory agencies.

Physician Self-Referrals

Certain provisions of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, commonly known as “Stark II,” prohibit us, subject to certain exceptions, from submitting claims to the Medicare and Medicaid programs for “designated health services” if we have a financial relationship with the physician making the referral for such services or with a member of such physician’s immediate family. The term “designated health services” includes several services commonly performed or supplied by us, including durable medical equipment, home health services and parenteral and enteral nutrition. In addition, “financial relationship” is broadly defined to include any ownership or investment interest or compensation arrangement involving remuneration between us and the physician at issue. Violations of Stark II may result in loss of Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, civil penalties and exclusion from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. A person who engages in a scheme to circumvent the Stark Law’s referral prohibition may be subject to penalties as well.

On January 4, 2001, CMS issued the first of two phases of final regulations (“Phase I”) to clarify the meaning and application of Stark II. On March 26, 2004, CMS released the second phase of the final regulations (“Phase II”). The Phase I and Phase II final regulations address the primary substantive aspects of the prohibition and various exceptions. The Phase I regulations defined previously undefined key terms, clarified prior definitions, and created exceptions for certain “indirect compensation arrangements,” “fair market value” transactions, arrangements involving non-monetary compensation up to $300, and risk-sharing arrangements, among others. For certain indirect compensation relationships, the regulations permit providers to bill for items provided in connection with an otherwise prohibited referral, if the provider does not know, and does not act in reckless disregard or deliberate ignorance of, the identity of the referring physician. Phase I of the final regulations became effective on January 4, 2002, except with respect to enforcement of the prohibition’s application to certain percentage physician compensation arrangements, which effectiveness was delayed several times by CMS. In the Phase II final regulations, which became effective on July 26, 2004, CMS addressed remaining Stark exceptions not addressed in the Phase I regulation—primarily related to compensation

12

Table of Contents

arrangements, but also addressed certain exceptions related to ownership and investment interests, reporting requirements and sanctions. CMS also finalized its approach to percentage compensation arrangements, permitting them in certain circumstances.

In addition, a number of the states in which we operate have similar or broader prohibitions on physician self-referrals. Finally, enforcement activity and resulting case law developments have increased the legal risks of physician compensation arrangements that do not satisfy the terms of an exception to Stark II, especially in the area of joint venture arrangements with physicians.

False Claims

We are subject to state and federal laws that govern the submission of claims for reimbursement. The federal False Claims Act imposes civil liability on individuals or entities that submit false or fraudulent claims for payment to the government. Violations of the False Claims Act may result in treble damages, civil monetary penalties for each false claim submitted and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In addition, we could be subject to criminal penalties under a variety of federal statutes to the extent that we knowingly violate legal requirements under federal health programs or otherwise present false or fraudulent claims or documentation to the government.

The False Claims Act also allows a private individual to bring a qui tam suit on behalf of the government against a health care provider for violations of the False Claims Act. A qui tam suit may be brought by, with only a few exceptions, any private citizen who has material information of a false claim that has not yet been previously disclosed. Even if disclosed, the original source of the information leading to the public disclosure may still pursue such a suit. Although a corporate insider is often the plaintiff in such actions, an increasing number of outsiders are pursuing such suits.

In a qui tam suit, the private plaintiff is responsible for initiating a lawsuit that may eventually lead to the government recovering money of which it was defrauded. After the private plaintiff has initiated the lawsuit, the government must decide whether to intervene in the lawsuit and become the primary prosecutor. In the event the government declines to join the lawsuit, the private plaintiff may choose to pursue the case alone, in which case the private plaintiff’s counsel will have primary control over the prosecution (although the government must be kept apprised of the progress of the lawsuit and will still receive at least 70% of any recovered amounts). In return for bringing the suit on the government’s behalf, the statute provides that the private plaintiff is to receive up to 30% of the recovered amount from the litigation proceeds if the litigation is successful. The number of qui tam suits brought against health care providers has increased dramatically. In addition, at least five states—California, Illinois, Florida, Tennessee and Texas—have enacted laws modeled after the False Claims Act that allow those states to recover money which was fraudulently obtained by a health care provider from the state (e.g., Medicaid funds provided by the state).

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, mandates, among other things, the establishment of regulatory standards addressing the electronic exchange of health information, standards for the privacy and security of health information and standards for assigning unique health identifiers to health care providers. Sanctions for failure to comply with HIPAA standards include civil and criminal penalties.

Two standards have been promulgated under HIPAA with which we currently are required to comply. The Standards for Electronic Transactions require the use of standardized transactions and code sets for common health care transactions involving the exchange of certain types of information, including health care claims or equivalent encounter information, plan eligibility, referral certification and authorization, claims status, plan

13

Table of Contents

enrollment and disenrollment, payment and remittance advice, health plan premium payments, and coordination of benefits. The Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Information restricts use and disclosure of certain individually identifiable health information, called protected health information, or “PHI”. These Privacy Standards not only require our compliance with standards restricting the use and disclosure of PHI, but also require us to obtain satisfactory assurances that any business associate of ours who has access to our PHI similarly will safeguard such PHI. We believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with both of these HIPAA standards.

Two other standards have been promulgated under HIPAA, although compliance with these standards is not yet required. The Security Standards require us to implement certain security measures to protect electronic PHI. We are required to comply with these standards by April 20, 2005. In addition, CMS published a final rule covering the assignment of Unique Health Identifiers for Health Care Providers. The rule calls for the adoption of the National Provider Identifier as the standard unique health identifier for health care providers to use in filing and processing health care claims and other transactions. We are required to comply with these standards by May 23, 2007. We have evaluated these rules to determine the effects of the rules on our business, and we believe that we will have taken the appropriate steps to ensure that we will comply with these standards in all material respects by their respective compliance deadlines.

HIPAA also has created health care related crimes, and granted authority to the Secretary of the DHHS to impose certain civil penalties. Particularly, the Secretary may exclude from Medicare any individual with a direct or indirect ownership interest in an entity convicted of health care fraud or excluded from the program. HIPAA encourages the reporting of health care fraud by allowing reporting individuals to share in any recovery made by the government. HIPAA also requires new programs to control fraud and abuse, and new investigations, audits and inspections.

Under HIPAA it is a crime to:

These provisions of HIPAA create criminal sanctions for situations that were previously handled exclusively through civil repayments of overpayments, off-sets and fines. We believe that our business arrangements and practices comply with HIPAA. However, a violation could subject us to penalties, fines or possible exclusion from Medicare or Medicaid. Such sanctions could reduce our revenue or profits.

The False Statements statute prohibits knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact by any trick, scheme or device or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. A violation of this statute is a felony and may result in fines and/or imprisonment.

Compliance Program

In addition to our Corporate Integrity Agreement with the Office of Inspector General described below under the caption “—Corporate Integrity Agreement”, we have several voluntary programs to monitor compliance with federal and state laws and regulations applicable to health care entities which are designed to minimize the likelihood that we would engage in conduct or enter into contracts in violation of the fraud and abuse laws. While we believe that our compliance program meets the relevant guidance provided by the Office of Inspector General of the DHHS, we cannot provide any assurance that current or future administrative or judicial interpretations of existing laws or legislative enactment of new laws will not have a material adverse effect on our business.

14

Table of Contents

Health Care Reform Legislation

Economic, political and regulatory influences are subjecting the health care industry in the United States to fundamental change. Health care reform proposals have been formulated by the legislative and administrative branches of the federal government. In addition, some of the states in which we operate periodically consider various health care reform proposals. We anticipate that federal and state government bodies will continue to review and assess alternative health care delivery systems and payment methodologies and public debate of these issues will continue in the future. Due to uncertainties regarding the ultimate features of reform initiatives and their enactment and implementation, we cannot predict, which, if any, of such reform proposals will be adopted or when they may be adopted or that any such reforms will not have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Health care is an area of extensive and dynamic regulatory change. Changes in the law or new interpretations of existing laws can have a dramatic effect on permissible activities, the relative costs associated with doing business and the amount of reimbursement by government and other third-party payors.

Corporate Integrity Agreement

Our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation, and the Office of Inspector General of the DHHS entered into a Corporate Integrity Agreement as part of the process of settling the United States federal government’s fraud claims against Rotech Medical Corporation in its bankruptcy proceeding. As the successor to the business and operations of Rotech Medical Corporation, we are subject to the provisions of the Corporate Integrity Agreement.

Providers and suppliers enter into corporate integrity agreements as part of settlements with the federal government in order that the federal government will waive its right to permissively exclude them from participating in federal health care programs.

The Corporate Integrity Agreement is for a term of five years beginning February 2002. Among other things, the Corporate Integrity Agreement requires us to conduct internal claims reviews related to our Medicare billing. In the first and fourth years of the agreement, the internal claims reviews will also be reviewed by an Independent Review Organization (“IRO”). Under certain circumstances, the internal claims reviews may also be reviewed by the IRO in the fifth year of the agreement. KPMG LLP acted as our IRO during the first year of the agreement. We must file reports of the reviews with the Office of Inspector General of the DHHS.

In addition, the Corporate Integrity Agreement imposes upon us (including in most instances our officers, directors, employees and others) various training requirements, as well as the need to have certain policies and procedures in place. It also requires that we have a Compliance Officer, several “Compliance Liaisons” and a Compliance Committee. We believe we are in compliance with these requirements.

The Corporate Integrity Agreement also mandates that we have certain procedures in place with respect to our acquisition process. More specifically, we are required to have an Acquisition Committee which approves all acquisitions before they are consummated. As part of the acquisition process, we will be required to conduct operational and file reviews of potential entities in which we might acquire an interest. Assuming that we decide to acquire an entity, we will be required to provide a report to the Office of Inspector General of the DHHS indicating that we followed the acquisition procedures set forth in the Corporate Integrity Agreement and specifying any corrective action that might be necessary post acquisition.

The Corporate Integrity Agreement restricts us from hiring any person or contractor who is ineligible to participate in federal health care programs, federal procurement or federal non-procurement programs or has been convicted of a criminal offense related to the provision of health care items or services. We are obligated to conduct ongoing reviews of the qualifications of all of our employees and contractors. If a current employee or contractor is or becomes an ineligible employee as contemplated by the Corporate Integrity Agreement, such individual must be relieved of any responsibility for, and removed from any involvement with, our business operations relating to federal health care programs.

15

Table of Contents

As part of the Corporate Integrity Agreement, we also have certain obligations with respect to repayment of identified overpayments and reporting of “Material Deficiencies” we may learn of with respect to our relationship with federal health care programs. We also must submit annual reports to the Office of Inspector General of the DHHS regarding our compliance with the Corporate Integrity Agreement generally. To the extent that we violate the terms of the Corporate Integrity Agreement, we may be subject to substantial penalties, including stipulated cash penalties ranging from $1,000 per day to $2,500 per day for each day we are in breach of the agreement and, possibly, exclusion from federal health care programs.

Suppliers

We purchase our supplies from a variety of independent suppliers. We are not dependent upon any one supplier, and believe that our supplies can be provided by several suppliers. We have long-standing relationships with most of our largest national suppliers in each product category. We typically focus on one or two suppliers in each product category in an effort to maximize delivery efficiency and gross margins.

Sales

We believe that the sales and marketing skills of our employees are instrumental to the success of our business. We provide marketing, training, product and service information to all of our technical personnel through our intranet and through seminars conducted on a company-wide basis so that they can communicate effectively with physicians about our equipment and services. We emphasize the cross-marketing of all our equipment and services to physicians with which we have already developed professional relationships.

Quality Control

We are committed to providing consistently high quality equipment and services. Our quality control procedures and training programs are designed to promote greater responsiveness and sensitivity to individual patient needs and to provide a high level of quality assurance and convenience to the patient and the referring physician. Licensed respiratory therapists and registered nurses provide professional health care support.

The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, or JCAHO, is a nationally recognized organization which develops standards for various health care industry segments and monitors compliance with those standards through voluntary surveys of participating providers. Accreditation by JCAHO entails a lengthy review process that is conducted at least every three years. We believe that our accreditation by JCAHO is indicative of our commitment to providing consistently high quality equipment and services. Currently, 100% of our operating centers are accredited by JCAHO.

Competition

The home medical equipment market is highly competitive and divided among a large number of providers, some of which are national providers, but most of which are either regional or local providers. Our largest national home medical equipment provider competitors are Apria Healthcare Group, Inc., Lincare Holdings, Inc., American Home Patient, Inc., Praxair, Inc. and Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. The rest of the market consists of several medium-size competitors, as well as numerous small (under $5 million in revenues) local operations. We also face competition from other types of health care providers, including hospitals, home health agencies and health maintenance organizations. We believe that the most important competitive factors in the regional and local markets are:

16

Table of Contents

We believe that it is important to be able to offer a broad range of complementary equipment and services to provide patients access through a single source. We believe that we compete effectively with respect to all of the above factors and that we have an established record as a quality provider of a range of complementary home medical equipment and services.

Insurance

Our business is subject to general and professional liability, products liability, employment practices liability, workers’ compensation, automobile liability, personal injury and other liability claims that are generally covered by insurance. We have insurance policies that contain various customary levels of deductibles and self-insured retentions and provide us with protection against claims alleging bodily injury or property damage arising out of our operations. These insurance policies are subject to annual renewal. We believe that our insurance coverage is appropriate based upon historical claims and the nature and risks of our business.

Employees

Currently, we have approximately 4,331 full time employees. Our employees are not currently represented by a labor union or other labor organization. We believe our relations with our employees are good.

Principal Executive Office and Website Access To Information

Our principal executive offices are located at 2600 Technology Drive, Suite 300, Orlando, Florida, 32804 and our telephone number there is (407) 822-4600. Our internet website address is www.rotech.com.

We make available free of charge on or through our website our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Our reports are also available free of charge on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. Also available free of charge on our website are the following corporate governance documents:

All of our reports and corporate governance documents may also be obtained without charge, upon written request directed to the Chief Legal Officer, Rotech Healthcare Inc., 2600 Technology Drive, Suite 300, Orlando, Florida, 32804. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report and is not a part of this annual report.

17

Table of Contents

Executive Officers

Our executive officers and their respective ages and positions are as follows:

Philip L. Carter became President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of our company in December 2002. From March 2002 to November 2002, Mr. Carter was self-employed. From May 1998 to February 2002, Mr. Carter was the Chief Executive Officer and a director of Apria Healthcare Group Inc. Prior to joining Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Mr. Carter had served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Mac Frugal’s Bargains Close-Outs Inc., a chain of retail discount stores, since 1995.

Michael R. Dobbs became Chief Operating Officer of our company in January 2003. Prior to joining our company, Mr. Dobbs was an officer of Apria Healthcare Group Inc., serving as Executive Vice President, Logistics from January 1999 to January 2003 and as Senior Vice President, Logistics from June 1998 to January 1999. Prior to joining Apria Healthcare Group Inc., Mr. Dobbs served as Senior Vice President of Distribution for Mac Frugal’s Bargains Close-Outs Inc. from 1991 to 1998.

Barry E. Stewart, our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, joined us in July 2004. Prior to joining our company, Mr. Stewart was Chief Financial Officer of Evolved Digital Systems, Inc. from 2001 to 2004, and Vice President of Finance of Community Health Systems, Inc. from 1996 to 2001. Prior to 1996, Mr. Stewart served in various managing director positions with national commercial banks. Mr. Stewart currently serves as a director and the chairman of the audit committee of the board of directors for FloTek Industries, Inc., a publicly traded company headquartered in Houston, Texas. Mr. Stewart is a licensed Certified Public Accountant.

Risk Factors

Health care is an area of extensive and dynamic regulatory change that involves a number of risks. The following discussion highlights some of these risks. These and other risks discussed in this report could materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

A substantial percentage of our revenue is attributable to Medicare. Our business may be significantly impacted by changes in Medicare reimbursement policies and recent legislative changes aimed at reducing health care costs.

A substantial percentage of our revenue is attributable to Medicare and, to a lesser extent, Medicaid. The remainder of our billings are paid by other third-party payors, including private insurers, and by the patients themselves. Medicare, Medicaid and other federally funded programs (primarily Veterans Administration contracts) accounted for approximately 67.9% of our revenues for three months ended March 31, 2002, approximately 69.1% of revenues for the nine months ended December 31, 2002, approximately 71.1% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003 and approximately 71.0% of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004.

There have been a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the health care system in ways that could impact our ability to sell our products and services profitably. In the United States, federal and state lawmakers regularly propose and, at times, enact new legislation establishing significant changes in the healthcare system. Recent news headlines highlighted the need to control health care spending in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and this pressure may continue to intensify over time. Recent legislation continues to impact and reduce Medicare payment levels. Under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, additional reductions have been imposed. Changes under MMA include a reduction in payments for certain types of home medical equipment, including wheelchairs, nebulizers and oxygen equipment, a freeze in payments for other home medical equipment from 2004 through 2008, competitive

18

Table of Contents

bidding requirements, new clinical conditions for payment and quality standards. In addition, as of January 1, 2005, MMA also reduced payments for inhalation drugs delivered through nebulizer equipment to an amount based on 106% of average sales price. Reductions in Medicare reimbursement for oxygen, nebulizers and inhalation medications could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and profitability. We cannot predict the impact that any federal legislation enacted in the future will have on our revenues and profitability.

Changes in the law or new interpretations of existing laws can have a dramatic effect on permissible activities, the relative costs associated with doing business and the amount of reimbursement by government and other third-party payors. Reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs is subject to federal and state statutory and regulatory requirements, administrative rulings, interpretations of policy, implementation of reimbursement procedures, renewal of Veterans Administration contracts, retroactive payment adjustments and governmental funding restrictions. Our levels of revenue and profitability, like those of other health care companies, are affected by the continuing efforts of government payors to contain or reduce the costs of health care by lowering reimbursement rates.

A substantial percentage of our business is derived from the sale of Medicare-covered HME items, including oxygen, and recent legislation reduces payment amounts for certain categories of HME.

Currently, Medicare payments to us for our HME products are based on the lesser of the actual charge for the item or the applicable Medicare fee schedule amount. Under MMA, from 2004 through 2008, most payments for HME are set at the 2003 level and therefore, are “frozen,” unless the item becomes subject to further reductions based on Federal Health Benefits Program median payment amounts as described below, or are subject to competitive bidding. As of January 1, 2005, the fee schedule amounts for certain items of HME, including wheelchairs and nebulizers, were further reduced, based on the percentage difference between the amount of payment otherwise determined for 2002 and the median amount of payment under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, or FEHBP as determined by the Office of the Inspector General of DHHS, or OIG. The FEHBP adjusted payments are to remain “frozen” through 2008 unless the particular item becomes subject to competitive bidding.

The fee schedule amounts for oxygen and oxygen equipment are also to be calculated using this methodology. A September 2004 OIG report entitled “Medicare Payment Rates for Home Oxygen Equipment” surveyed FEHBP prices for oxygen equipment and found that the median 2002 prices were considerably lower than Medicare payments for those items. According to the report, the 2002 median FEHBP payments for five oxygen codes showed that the FEHBP median payments for stationary home oxygen equipment were approximately 15.5% less than Medicare payments for stationary home oxygen equipment and approximately 11.3% less than Medicare payments for portable home oxygen equipment. On February 4, 2005, CMS published notice CMS-1299-N announcing a delay in the implementation of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates. The notice states that CMS was informed by the OIG that it will need to collect additional information before the FEHBP median prices for oxygen are finalized. Until such prices are established, Medicare claims for oxygen equipment furnished on or after January 1, 2005 will be paid based on the 2004 monthly payment amounts. CMS is expected to calculate and implement the lower 2005 payment amounts upon receipt of the additional information from the OIG. CMS has stated that no retroactive adjustments are to be made once the new payment amounts are set. Reductions in payment rates for 2005 established by CMS for the non-oxygen HME items subject to the FEHBP provisions range between 4% and 16%. The non-oxygen HME items subject to the Medicare price cuts accounted for approximately 2% of our recorded revenues in 2004. If the proposed reductions in the Medicare fee schedules for home oxygen equipment (as set forth in the September 2004 OIG report discussed above) together with the additional reimbursement reductions mandated by the MMA in 2005 for other home medical equipment (excluding inhalation drugs) had been implemented in 2004, we believe it would have resulted in a reduction in our 2004 recorded revenues in the range of approximately $30 million to $35 million. At this time, we cannot determine the outcome of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates, the date on which the new payment amounts will become effective or the ultimate impact thereof on our business. Reductions in reimbursement for Medicare-covered HME items, including oxygen, could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations.

A significant percentage of our business is derived from the sale of Medicare-covered respiratory medications, and recent legislation imposes significant reductions in Medicare reimbursement for such inhalation drugs.

MMA also revises the payment methodology for certain drugs, including inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers. Prior to MMA, Medicare paid for these drugs based on AWP, as reported by drug manufacturers.

19

Table of Contents

Beginning January 1, 2004, Medicare payments were reduced for most of our Part B inhalation drugs to 80% of AWP from 95% of AWP, a reduction of approximately 15 percent. This reduction in Medicare payment rates for inhalation drugs reduced our revenues and operating income by approximately $24 million in 2004. As of January 1, 2005, payments for drugs delivered through nebulizer equipment are based on 106% of ASP. ASP is defined statutorily as the volume weighted average of manufacturers’ average sales prices, calculated by adding the manufacturers’ average sales prices for the drug in the fiscal quarter to the number of units sold and then divided by the total number of units sold for all national drug codes assigned to the product. Under the ASP methodology, Medicare generally will pay 106% of ASP for multiple source drugs and 106% of the lesser of ASP or wholesale acquisition cost for single source drugs. In addition, if the ASP exceeds the widely available market price by more than 5%, CMS may substitute the widely available market price for the ASP. ASP payment rates are calculated and updated quarterly using the most recent manufacturer data available. Manufacturer ASP data submissions are due to CMS not later than 30 days after the last day of each calendar quarter. Quarterly updates are to be implemented to reflect these quarterly submissions by manufacturers. Third quarter 2004 data was used to calculate the ASP payment amounts for the first quarter of 2005. ASP payment amounts for our products may fluctuate from quarter to quarter, and if these payment amounts are reduced in future quarters, this could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations in 2005 and beyond.

The ASP payment amounts for the first and second quarters of 2005 for many drugs are significantly less than the payment amounts for these drugs in 2004. For example, the payment rates, as posted by CMS, for two prevalent inhalation drugs, albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide, were reduced from $0.39 and $2.82 per milligram in 2004 to $0.065 and $0.287 for the first quarter of 2005, respectively. For the second quarter of 2005, payment rates, as posted by CMS, for albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide were changed to $0.090 and $0.202, respectively. Given the overall reduction in payment for inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers, CMS established a $57 dispensing fee for inhalation drugs shipped to a beneficiary during a 30-day period or $80 for a 90-day period. CMS intends to revisit the payment amount for the dispensing fees during 2005 and to proceed through notice and comment rulemaking in order to establish an appropriate dispensing fee, if any, for 2006. We cannot predict the outcome of any future rulemaking by CMS. These dispensing fees may be reduced or eliminated in 2006 or beyond, and such reductions or eliminations, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations. Medicare-reimbursed inhalation drug therapies provided by us in 2004 accounted for approximately 17% of our recorded revenues. While we have been able, based upon the increased dispensing fees, to continue offering inhalation drugs to Medicare patients in 2005, the pricing changes resulting from the ASP payment rates are expected to result in a material reduction in the revenues and profitability of our inhalation drug business and we cannot predict whether it will continue to be economically feasible for us to continue to provide inhalation drugs in the future.

Federal law establishing a competitive bidding process under Medicare could negatively affect our business and financial condition.

In 1999-2001, CMS conducted competitive bidding demonstrations for certain Medicare services. Under MMA, starting in 2007, Medicare will begin a nationwide competitive bidding program in ten high-population metropolitan services areas (MSAs) for certain high cost and high utilization items. The program will expand to cover 80 MSAs in 2009 and additional areas thereafter. Competitive bidding will require suppliers to compete for the rights to provide items to beneficiaries in a defined region. Only a limited number of suppliers will be selected in any given MSA, resulting in restricted supplier choices for beneficiaries. Competitive bidding may result in lower reimbursement or the loss of our ability to provide services in certain regions. MMA permits certain exemptions from competitive bidding, including exemptions for rural areas and areas with low population density within urban areas that are not competitive, unless there is a significant national market through mail-order for the particular item. A large number of our facilities are located in such areas. However, the criteria for how the exemption will be applied have not yet been determined. The proposed regulations implementing the competitive bidding program are expected to be published in the summer of 2005 and finalized by the summer of 2006. Therefore, at this time, the impact on our business is uncertain.

20

Table of Contents

Regulatory changes subject the Medicare reimbursement rates for our equipment and services to potential discretionary adjustment by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The Balanced Budget Act of 1997, or BBA 97, granted authority to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, or DHHS, to increase or reduce the reimbursement for home medical equipment, including oxygen, by 15% each year under an inherent reasonableness procedure. On February 11, 2003, CMS made effective an interim final rule implementing the inherent reasonableness authority, which allows the agency and carriers to adjust payment amounts by up to 15% per year for certain items and services covered by Part B when the existing payment amount is determined to be grossly excessive or deficient. The regulation lists factors that may be used by CMS and the carriers to determine whether an existing reimbursement rate is grossly excessive or deficient and to determine what is a realistic and equitable payment amount. Also, under the regulation, CMS and the carriers will not consider a payment amount to be grossly excessive or deficient and make an adjustment if they determine that an overall payment adjustment of less than 15% is necessary to produce a realistic and equitable payment amount. In addition to its inherent reasonableness authority, CMS has the discretion to reduce the reimbursement for home medical equipment and other non-HME services to an amount based on the payment amount for the least costly alternative treatment that meets the Medicare beneficiary’s medical needs. Least costly alternative, or LCA, determinations are applied to particular products and services by CMS and its carriers through the informal notice and comment process used in establishing local coverage policies for HME. This process need not be followed for LCA determinations made on individual claims. Using either its inherent reasonableness or least costly alternative authority, CMS and the carriers may reduce reimbursement levels for certain items and services covered by Part B, including products and services we offer, which could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations.

Future reductions in reimbursement rates under Medicaid could negatively affect our business and financial condition.

Due to budgetary shortfalls, many states are considering, or have enacted, cuts to their Medicaid programs. These cuts have included, or may include, elimination or reduction of coverage for some or all of our equipment and services, amounts eligible for payment under co-insurance arrangements, or payment rates for covered items. Continued state budgetary pressures could lead to further reductions in funding for the reimbursement for our equipment and services which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and operating results.

In addition to cost containment initiatives associated with Medicare and Medicaid, we are affected by continuing efforts by private third-party payors to control their costs. If we lower our prices due to pricing pressures from private third-party payors, our results of operations and financial condition would likely deteriorate.

Private payors continually seek to control the cost of providing health care services through direct contracts with health care providers, increased oversight and greater enrollment of patients in managed care programs and preferred provider organizations. These private payors are increasingly demanding discounted fee structures and the assumption by the health care provider of all or a portion of the financial risk. Reimbursement payments under private payor programs may not remain at current levels and may not be sufficient to cover the costs allocable to patients eligible for reimbursement pursuant to such programs, and we may suffer deterioration in pricing flexibility, changes in payor mix and growth in operating expenses in excess of increases in payments by private third-party payors. We may be compelled to lower our prices due to increased pricing pressures, which could cause our results of operations and financial condition to deteriorate.

Failure to maintain current levels of collectibility of our accounts receivable would likely have a significant negative impact on our profitability and cash flow.

Billing and collection for our services is a complex process requiring constant attention and involvement by senior management and ongoing enhancements to information systems and billing center operating procedures.

21

Table of Contents

We are paid for our services by various payors, including patients, insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid and others, each with distinct billing requirements. We recognize revenue when we provide services to patients. However, our ability to collect these receivables is dependent on our submissions to payors of accurate and complete documentation. In order for us to bill and receive payment for our services, the physician and the patient must provide appropriate billing information. Following up on incorrect or missing information generally slows down the billing process and the collection of accounts receivable. Failure to meet the billing requirements of the different payors could result in a decline of our revenues, profitability and cash flow.

Further, even if our billing procedures comply with all third-party payor requirements, some of our payors may experience financial difficulties or may otherwise not pay accounts receivable when due, which would result in increased write-offs or provisions for doubtful accounts. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain our current levels of collectibility or that third-party payors will not experience financial difficulties. If we are unable to collect our accounts receivable on a timely basis, our revenues, profitability and cash flow likely will decline.

In addition, in connection with our ongoing consolidation of billing centers, we have experienced in the past short-term disruptions in our operations and collection efforts. If we experience such disruptions in the future, our revenues, profitability and cash flow may significantly decline.

We are subject to periodic audits by governmental and private payors.

We are subject to periodic audits by Medicare and Medicaid programs, and the oversight agencies for these programs have rights and remedies they can assert against us if they determine we have overcharged the programs or failed to comply with program requirements. These agencies could seek to require us to repay any overcharges or amounts billed in violation of program requirements, or could make deductions from future amounts otherwise due to us from these programs. We could also be subject to fines, criminal penalties or program exclusions. Private payors also reserve rights to conduct audits and make monetary adjustments. See “Business—Government Regulation” for a discussion of recent efforts by government payors to reduce health care costs.

Our business, including our participation in the Medicare and Medicaid program, is subject to extensive laws and government regulations. Failure by us to comply with these laws and regulations could subject us to severe sanctions and have a significant negative impact on our operations.

We are subject to stringent laws and regulations at both the federal and state levels, including with respect to:

22

Table of Contents

Existing United States laws governing Medicare and state health care programs such as Medicaid, as well as similar laws enacted in many states, impose a broad variety of prohibitions on soliciting, receiving, offering or paying, directly or indirectly, any form of remuneration, payment or benefit for the referral of a patient for services or products reimbursable by Medicare or a state health care program. The federal government has published regulations that provide exceptions or “safe harbors” for business transactions that will be deemed not to violate these prohibitions. Violation of these prohibitions may result in civil and criminal penalties and exclusion from participation in Medicare and state health care programs.

The federal and state “Stark Laws” impose a broad range of restrictions upon referring physicians (and their immediate family) and providers of certain designated health services under Medicare and state health care programs, including restrictions on financial relationships between the referring physicians and the providers of the designated health care services. Services which we provide are classified as designated health services and fall within the regulatory scope of the Stark Laws. Significant criminal, civil and administrative penalties may be imposed for violation of these laws.

We are also subject to strict licensing and safety requirements by the federal government and many states. Furthermore, many state laws prohibit physicians from sharing professional fees with non-physicians and prohibit non-physician entities, such as us, from practicing medicine and from employing physicians to practice medicine.

In addition, both federal and state government agencies have heightened and coordinated civil and criminal enforcement efforts as part of numerous ongoing investigations of health care companies, as well as their executives and managers. These investigations relate to a wide variety of matters, including referral and billing practices.

Further, amendments to the False Claims Act have made it easier for private parties to bring “qui tam” whistleblower lawsuits against companies. Some states have adopted similar state whistleblower and false claims provisions.

The Office of the Inspector General of the DHHS and the Department of Justice, or DOJ, have, from time to time, established national enforcement initiatives that focus on specific billing practices or other suspected areas of abuse. Some of our activities could become the subject of governmental investigations or inquiries. In 2002, we entered into a settlement agreement with the DOJ and the DHHS to settle claims against Rotech Medical Corporation relating to certain Medicare and Medicaid billings. In addition, we or our executives could be included in other governmental investigations or named as defendants in private litigation, resulting in adverse publicity against us.

On April 30, 2003, federal agents served search warrants at our corporate headquarters and four other facilities in three states and were provided access to a number of current and historical financial records and other materials. Since that time, we have received subpoenas on behalf of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois requesting the same information including information relating to Medicare billing and Department of Veterans Affairs contracting. We are cooperating fully with the investigation. However, we can give no assurances as to the duration of the investigation or as to whether or not the government will institute proceedings against us or any of our employees or as to the violations that may be asserted.

If we fail to comply with the laws and regulations relevant to our business, we could be subject to civil and/or criminal penalties, demands from the government for refunds or recoupment of amounts previously paid to us by the government, facility shutdowns and possible exclusion from participation in federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, any of which could have a significant negative impact on our operations. Some statutory and regulatory provisions, principally in the area of billing, have not been interpreted by the courts and may be interpreted or applied in a manner that might adversely affect us. Changes in health care laws or new interpretations of existing laws may have a dramatic effect on our business and results of operations.

23

Table of Contents

Failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and stock price.

We are in the process of documenting and testing our internal control procedures in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and a report by our independent auditors addressing these assessments. During the course of our testing we may identify deficiencies which we may not be able to remediate in time to meet the deadline imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act for compliance with the requirements of Section 404. In addition, if we fail to achieve and maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, as such standards are modified, supplemented or amended from time to time, we may not be able to ensure that we can conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Moreover, effective internal controls, particularly those related to revenue recognition, are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important to helping prevent financial fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business and operating results could be harmed, investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, and the trading price of our stock could drop significantly.

If we lose relationships with managed care organizations and other third-party payors, we could lose access to patients and our revenue would likely decline.

Managed care organizations and other third-party payors have continued to consolidate in order to enhance their ability to influence the delivery of health care services and to build volume that justifies discounted prices. Consequently, the health care needs of a large percentage of the United States population are now provided by a small number of managed care organizations and third-party payors. These organizations, including the Veterans Administration, generally enter into service agreements with a limited number of providers for needed services. To the extent such organizations terminate agreements with us and/or engage our competitors, our business could be materially adversely affected. If we lose relationships with managed care organizations and other third-party payors, including the Veterans Administration, we could lose access to patients and our revenue would likely decline.

If we fail to cultivate new or maintain established relationships with the physician referral sources, our revenues may decline.

Our success, in part, is dependent upon referrals and our ability to maintain good relations with physician referral sources. Physicians referring patients to us are not our employees, and are free to refer their patients to our competitors. If we are unable to successfully cultivate new referral sources and maintain strong relationships with our current referral sources, our revenues may decline.

Our medical gas and pharmacy operations are subject to extensive regulation by federal and state authorities.

Our medical gas and pharmacy operations are subject to extensive regulation by FDA and other federal and state authorities. Federal and state authorities enforce these regulations through periodic and unannounced inspections. Our failure to maintain regulatory compliance could result in enforcement action, including warning letters, fines, product recalls or seizures, temporary or permanent injunctions, and civil or criminal penalties which would materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

A percentage of our business is derived from the sale of our compounded respiratory medications. Pharmacy compounding is considered to be within the practice of medicine and is regulated primarily under state law. The line between the activities that constitute drug compounding and the activities that constitute drug manufacturing (which is subject to rigorous regulations by the FDA under the FFDCA) is not clear, and the FDA may define the scope of drug manufacturing activities more broadly than we or the state pharmacy board do. If FDA determines that our compounding activities are more consistent with the activities of a drug manufacturer, FDA could exercise its enforcement authority to temporarily or permanently suspend part or all of our compounding operations, seize part or all of our compounding raw materials and compounded products, or require us to comply with the FFDCA’s rigorous requirements for manufacturing a new drug.

24

Table of Contents

If we do not comply with laws and regulations governing the confidentiality of medical information, we could be subject to criminal penalties and civil sanctions.

In 1996, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was enacted, among other things, to establish uniform standards governing the conduct of certain electronic health care transactions and to protect the security and privacy of individually identifiable health information maintained or transmitted by health care providers, health plans and health care clearinghouses.

Two standards have been promulgated under HIPAA with which we currently are required to comply. We must comply with the Standards for Electronic Transactions, which establish standards for common health care transactions, such as claims information, plan eligibility, payment information and the use of electronic signatures; unique identifiers for providers, employers, health plans and individuals; security; privacy; and enforcement. We were required to comply with these Standards by October 16, 2003. We also must comply with the Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Information, which restricts our use and disclosure of certain individually identifiable health information. We were required to comply with the Privacy Standards by April 14, 2003. We believe we are in compliance in all material respects with both of these HIPAA standards. Two other standards relevant to our use of medical information have been promulgated under HIPAA, although our compliance with these standards is not yet required. The Security Standards will require us to implement certain security measures to safeguard certain electronic health information by April 20, 2005. In addition, CMS published a final rule, which will require us to adopt a Unique Health Identifiers for use in filing and processing health care claims and other transactions by May 23, 2007. While the government intended this legislation to reduce administrative expenses and burdens for the health care industry, our compliance with this law may entail significant and costly changes for us. If we fail to comply with these standards, we could be subject to criminal penalties and civil sanctions.

Lack of accreditation of our operating centers or failure to meet government standards for coverage could result in a decline in our revenues.

Currently, 100% of our operating centers are accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, or JCAHO. If future reviews by JCAHO do not result in continued accreditation of our operating centers, we would likely experience a decline in our revenues. Further, under MMA, any entity or individual that bills Medicare for home medical equipment and certain supplies and has a supplier number for submission of claims will be subject to new quality standards as a condition of receiving payment from the Medicare program. New standards are to be developed by CMS and applied by independent accreditation organizations. MMA also authorizes CMS to establish clinical conditions for payment for home medical equipment. These new supplier standards and clinical conditions for payment could limit or reduce the number of individuals who can sell or provide our products and could restrict coverage for our products. In addition, because we have Medicare supplier numbers and are subject to any new supplier standards, our failure to meet any new supplier standards could affect our ability to bill and therefore could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to comply with our Corporate Integrity Agreement or the terms of our settlement with the federal government, we could be subject to severe sanctions and be excluded from participating in federal and state health care programs, as well as adverse publicity, which could result in a material decrease in our revenue and seriously undermine our ability to compete for business, negotiate acquisitions, hire new personnel and otherwise conduct our business.

On February 11, 2002, our predecessor entered into a Corporate Integrity Agreement with the DHHS. We have assumed the obligations under this agreement (and the settlement with the federal government). Pursuant to the terms of this agreement, we are obligated to implement procedures designed to ensure compliance with the requirements of Medicare, Medicaid and all other federal health care programs. The Corporate Integrity Agreement is effective for five years. Among other things, the Corporate Integrity Agreement requires us to

25

Table of Contents

conduct internal claims reviews relating to our Medicare billing. In the first and fourth years of the agreement, the internal claim reviews must also be reviewed by an Independent Review Organization (currently KPMG LLP). We must file reports of the reviews with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. As a result of these reviews we may be required to refund certain payments to the federal government and/or be subject to penalties resulting from such overpayments. In addition, failure by us to comply with the Corporate Integrity Agreement could subject us to substantial monetary penalties, exclusion from participation in federal health care programs, as well as adverse publicity, which could seriously undermine our ability to compete for business, negotiate acquisitions, hire new personnel and otherwise conduct our business, and could result in a deterioration in our financial condition and results of operations. See “Business—Corporate Integrity Agreement” for a more detailed description of the terms of the Corporate Integrity Agreement.

In June 2002, we uncovered a pattern of falsified bulk sales of equipment to the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as certain improperly recorded revenues from non-bulk VA service contracts.

In late June 2002, we discovered that an independent contractor (who was also a former employee) had falsified certain bulk sales to the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) by fabricating documentation for nonexistent sales of medical equipment in bulk to the VA. Upon learning of these falsified sales, we promptly:

The investigation confirmed the existence of a pattern of falsified bulk sales of equipment to the VA, as well as certain improperly recorded revenues from non-bulk VA service contracts. The total of the falsified sales was originally recorded to our books and records as net revenue of $30.4 million. Of this amount, $14.8 million was recorded during the six-month period from October 1, 2001 to March 31, 2002. In addition, $8.1 million of receivables associated with non-bulk VA service contracts were reversed. In connection with the investigation, we recovered approximately $12.5 million of medical equipment inventory, virtually all of which was in resalable condition. Although we have concluded our investigation, it is possible that our investigation did not uncover every instance of fraudulent activity. In addition, we received informal requests for information on March 7, 2003 and on April 17, 2003, from the Division of Enforcement of the Securities and Exchange Commission related to our internal investigation regarding VA contracts, and provided documents in response to such requests. At this time we have not received any further requests for information from the Securities and Exchange Commission, however, we can give no assurances as to whether or not the Securities and Exchange Commission will request additional information or take any other action.

As a result of the investigation, we restated our consolidated financial statements for each of the years ended December 31, 1999, 2000 and 2001 and for the three months ended March 31, 2002. The restatement reflects a net after-tax charge of $14.1 million over a three-year period.

We experience competition from numerous other home medical equipment providers, and this competition could result in a deterioration in our revenues and business.

The home medical equipment market is highly competitive and divided among a large number of providers, some of which are national providers but most of which are either regional or local providers. Home respiratory companies compete primarily on the basis of service rather than price since reimbursement levels are established by Medicare and Medicaid or by the individual determinations of private health plans. Our ability to compete successfully and to increase our referrals of new customers are highly dependent upon our reputation within each

26

Table of Contents

local health care market for providing responsive, professional and high-quality service, a professional staff with clinical and technical expertise and achieving strong customer satisfaction.

Some of our competitors may now or in the future have greater financial or marketing resources than we do. Our largest national home medical equipment provider competitors are Apria Healthcare Group, Inc., Lincare Holdings, Inc., American Home Patient, Inc., Praxair, Inc. and Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. The rest of the market consists of several medium-size competitors, as well as hundreds of smaller companies with under $5 million in revenues. Many of the smaller, owner-operated home medical equipment providers have a level of service quality that is difficult to replicate. There are relatively few barriers to entry in local home health care markets. The competitive nature of the home medical equipment environment could result in a deterioration in our revenues and our business.

Since our financial statements reflect fresh-start reporting adjustments made upon our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy, information reflecting our results of operations and financial condition will not be comparable to prior periods of our predecessor.

Upon our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy, we adopted fresh-start reporting. Under fresh-start reporting, our reorganization value is allocated to our assets based on their respective fair values in conformity with the purchase method of accounting for business combinations. Any portion not attributed to specific tangible or identified intangible assets is reported as an intangible asset referred to as “reorganization value in excess of value of identifiable assets—goodwill.” In adopting fresh-start reporting, we engaged an independent financial advisor to assist in the determination of the reorganization value or fair value of the entity. Within the implementation of fresh-start reporting, the book value of our fixed assets and amortization schedules has changed. Accordingly, you will not be able to compare certain information reflecting our results of operations and financial condition to those of our predecessor for periods prior to its emergence from bankruptcy.

We are engaged in a series of initiatives to strengthen our organizational structure and the failure to complete such initiatives could negatively affect our operating efficiencies and financial performance.

We have engaged in a series of activities to strengthen our organizational structure and reposition us for future growth. These actions include selective reduction in headcount, renegotiation of certain vendor contracts, substantial reduction in the number of billing centers, discontinuation of certain product lines and branch locations, centralization of certain administrative functions (including billing and purchasing), development and implementation of an advanced information and billing system, and enhancement of regulatory compliance programs. These activities are expected to continue for so long as management determines is necessary and appropriate. Although we have been successful in implementing many of these measures, if we are unable to continue to do so on satisfactory terms or at all, our ability to execute our business strategy and achieve operating efficiency will be adversely affected.

We have substantial outstanding indebtedness, which could adversely affect our financial condition.

As of March 21, 2005, our total consolidated long-term debt (including current maturities) accounted for approximately 33.3% of our total capitalization.

The degree to which we are leveraged could have important consequences, because:

27

Table of Contents

Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our debt, will depend on our ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, business, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

Our business may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations and future borrowings may not be available to us under credit facilities in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay our debt, or to fund our other liquidity needs. We may need to refinance all or a portion of our debt, on or before maturity. We may not be able to refinance any of our debt, including any credit facilities and the notes, on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Our business and growth strategies will require additional capital, which we may not be able to raise on terms satisfactory to us, if at all.

Our business requires us to make significant capital expenditures relating to the purchase and maintenance of the medical equipment used in our business. In the year ended December 31, 2004, our capital expenditures were approximately $54.0 million, representing 10.1% of our net revenues. In addition, we may pursue our growth strategy in part through acquisitions (as competitive and pricing pressures encourage consolidation and economies of scale) and the start-up of new locations. We may need to incur additional indebtedness and/or sell equity securities, from time to time, to fund such capital expenditures. Sufficient financing may not be available to us on terms satisfactory to us, if at all.

In the event that we acquire companies, we may incur unknown liabilities for their past practices, we may be unable to successfully integrate such companies into our operations and our results of operations could deteriorate.

If we acquire additional companies, there can be no assurance that we will be able to integrate such companies successfully or manage our expanded operations effectively and profitably. The process of integrating newly acquired businesses may be costly and disruptive. Our operational, financial and management systems may be incompatible with or inadequate to cost-effectively integrate and manage the acquired systems. As a result, billing practices could be interrupted and cash collections on the newly acquired business could be delayed pending conversion of patient files onto our billing systems and receipt of provider numbers from government payors. The integration may place significant demands on our management, diverting their attention from our existing operations. If we are not successful in integrating acquired businesses, our results of operations would likely decline.

We may acquire businesses with unknown or contingent liabilities, including liabilities for failure to comply with health care laws and regulations. We have policies to conform the practices of acquired facilities to our standards and applicable law and generally intend to seek indemnification from prospective sellers covering these matters. We may, however, incur material liabilities for past activities of acquired businesses.

If we do not enhance and maintain effective and efficient information systems, our operations may be disrupted and our anticipated operating efficiency may not be realized.

Our operations are dependent on the enhancement and uninterrupted performance of our information systems. Failure to enhance and maintain reliable information systems or disruptions in our information systems

28

Table of Contents

could cause disruptions in our business operations, including billing and collections, loss of existing patients and difficulty in attracting new patients, patient and payor disputes, regulatory problems, increases in administrative expenses or other adverse consequences, any or all of which could disrupt our operations and prevent us from achieving operating efficiency.

We are highly dependent on our key personnel.

Our performance is substantially dependent on the performance and continued efforts of our senior management team. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers or other key employees could result in a decline in our business, results of operations and financial condition. In particular, the loss of the services of our Chief Executive Officer, Philip L. Carter, could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. We do not carry key person life insurance on any of our personnel. Our future success is dependent on the ability of our managers and sales personnel to manage and promote our business, operations and growth. Any inability to manage our operations effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, sales, results of operations and financial condition.

If we are not able to hire qualified management and other personnel, or if costs of compensation or employee benefits increase substantially, our ability to deliver equipment and services effectively could suffer and our profitability would likely decline.

The success of our business depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly motivated, well-qualified management and other personnel. Our highest cost is in the payment of salaries to our approximately 4,331 full time employees. We face significant competition in the recruitment of qualified employees, which has caused increased salary and wage rates. If we are unable to recruit or retain a sufficient number of qualified employees, or if the costs of compensation or employee benefits increase substantially, our ability to deliver services effectively could suffer and our profitability would likely decline.

Increases in our costs could erode our profit margins and substantially reduce our net income and cash flows.

Cost containment in the health care industry, fueled, in part, by federal and state government budgetary shortfalls, is likely to result in constant or decreasing reimbursement amounts for our equipment and services. As a result, we must control our operating cost levels, particularly labor and related costs. We compete with other health care providers to attract and retain qualified or skilled personnel. We also compete with various industries for lower-wage administrative and service employees. Since reimbursement rates are established by fee schedules mandated by Medicare, Medicaid and private payors, we are not able to offset the effects of general inflation in labor and related cost components, if any, through increases in prices for our equipment and services. Consequently, such cost increases could erode our profit margins and reduce our net income.

We may write-off intangible assets, such as goodwill.

Goodwill represents the excess of cost over fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed of purchased operations. As of December 31, 2003, this goodwill was approximately $11.3 million. As a result of the implementation of “fresh-start” reporting, the assets and liabilities of Rotech Medical Corporation were revalued, which resulted in approximately $668.3 million for reorganization value in excess of fair value of identifiable assets—goodwill and $20.0 million in identifiable intangible assets as of December 31, 2004. Any future acquisitions by us will likely result in the recognition of additional intangible assets.

On an ongoing basis, we evaluate whether facts and circumstances indicate any impairment of value of intangible assets. As circumstances after an acquisition can change, the value of intangible assets may not be realized by us. If we determine that a significant impairment has occurred, we would be required to write-off the impaired portion of the unamortized intangible assets, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the write-off occurs.

29

Table of Contents

We may be subject to claims arising from investigations and legal proceedings, which could have a significant negative impact on our results of operations and profitability.

The nature of our business subjects us to litigation in the ordinary course of our business. In addition, we are from time to time involved in other legal proceedings. Although the claims made against our predecessor prior to the date it filed for bankruptcy protection have been satisfied in accordance with the terms of its plan of reorganization or in connection with settlement agreements that were approved by the Bankruptcy Court prior to its emergence from bankruptcy (including all federal claims) or claims covered by our predecessor’s settlement agreements with IHS and/or its successors, any pending or future proceeding may have a significant negative impact on our results of operations and profitability. States in other bankruptcy cases have challenged whether their claims could be discharged in a federal bankruptcy proceeding if they never made an appearance in the case. Therefore, our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy may not result in a discharge of all state claims against us with respect to periods prior to the date it filed for bankruptcy protection. Any such claim not discharged could result in a decline in our financial condition and profitability.

If the coverage limits on our insurance policies are inadequate to cover our liabilities or our insurance costs continue to increase, our financial condition and results of operations would likely decline.

Participants in the health care industry, including us, are subject to substantial claims and litigation in the ordinary course, often involving large claims and significant defense costs. As a result of the liability risks inherent in our lines of business we maintain liability insurance intended to cover such claims. Our insurance policies are subject to annual renewal. The coverage limits of our insurance policies may not be adequate, and we may not be able to obtain liability insurance in the future on acceptable terms or at all. In addition, we have been advised by our insurance broker that our insurance premiums will be subject to increases in the future, which increases may be material. If the coverage limits are inadequate to cover our liabilities or our insurance costs continue to increase, our financial condition and results of operations would likely decline.

The lack of an established trading market for our common stock is likely to make it more difficult to dispose of or to obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of our common stock and may increase volatility.

There is no established trading market for our common stock and there can be no assurance that a public market for our common stock will develop or be sustained. Our common stock currently trades in interdealer and over-the-counter transactions, and price quotations are provided in the “pink sheets.” Our common stock is not listed on any securities exchange or automated quotation system. Accordingly, it is likely that an investor will find it more difficult to dispose of or to obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of our common stock and the price of our common stock may experience additional volatility. If market conditions and other factors are satisfactory, we currently intend to apply to list our common stock for trading on a securities exchange or automated quotation system prior to the end of the second quarter of 2005. However, there can be no assurance that we will receive approval to list our common stock on any securities exchange or automated quotation system in any particular time frame or at all.

We lease our offices and facilities. Our corporate headquarters currently consists of 31,223 square feet (of which we sublease 10,165 square feet) in an office building located at 2600 Technology Drive, Orlando, Florida, 32804. It is leased to us for a seven-year period ending August 18, 2008 at a current base rate of $49,903 per month (including sales tax), plus operating costs (which have historically been approximately $4,000 per month (including sales tax)). In addition to our corporate headquarters, we lease office facilities for approximately 475 locations. These facilities are primarily used for general office work and the dispatching of registered respiratory therapists, registered nurses, registered pharmacists and delivery personnel. Our office facilities vary in size from approximately 500 to 60,000 square feet. The total space leased for these offices is approximately 2.24 million square feet at an average price of $8.15 per square foot. All of such office space is leased pursuant to operating leases. We believe that our office locations and other facilities are suitable and adequate for our planned needs.

30

Table of Contents

ITEM 3.    LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Due to the nature of our business, we are involved from time to time in lawsuits that arise in the ordinary course of our business. We do not believe that any lawsuit that we (or our predecessor) are a party to, if resolved adversely, would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

On April 30, 2003, federal agents served search warrants at our corporate headquarters and four other facilities in three states and were provided access to a number of current and historical financial records and other materials. We have also received subpoenas on behalf of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois relating to the same information including information relating to Medicare billing and VA contracting. We are cooperating fully with the investigation; however, we can give no assurances as to the duration of the investigation or as to whether or not the government will institute proceedings against us or any of our employees or as to the violations that may be asserted. In addition, we received informal requests for information on March 7, 2003 and April 17, 2003 from the Division of Enforcement of the Securities and Exchange Commission related to matters that were the subject of our internal investigation regarding VA contracts discussed above under the caption “Risk Factors—In June 2002, we uncovered a pattern of falsified bulk sales of equipment to the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as certain improperly recorded revenues from non-bulk VA service contracts,” and we have provided documents in response to such requests. As a health care provider, we are subject to extensive government regulation, including numerous laws directed at preventing fraud and abuse and laws regulating reimbursement under various government programs. The marketing, billing, documentation and other practices of health care companies are all subject to government scrutiny. To ensure compliance with Medicare and other regulations, regional carriers often conduct audits and request patient records and other documents to support claims submitted by us for payment of services rendered to patients. Similarly, government agencies periodically open investigations and obtain information from health care providers pursuant to legal process. Violations of federal and state regulations can result in severe criminal, civil and administrative penalties and sanctions, including disqualification from Medicare and other reimbursement programs.

ITEM 4.    SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matters were submitted to a vote of our stockholders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

31

Table of Contents

PART II

ITEM 5.    MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER REPURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

There is no established trading market for our common stock. Our common stock currently trades in interdealer and over-the-counter transactions and price quotations are provided in the “pink sheets” by Pink Sheets LLC under the symbol “ROHI.PK” which can be found on their website at www.pinksheets.com. Upon effectiveness of our predecessor’s plan of reorganization on March 26, 2002, all of our outstanding common stock was distributed to our predecessor for further distribution to its senior creditors as contemplated by the plan of reorganization. Our common stock was issued pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by Section 1145 of the Bankruptcy Code. Although we received no cash proceeds from the initial distribution of our common stock pursuant to the plan of reorganization, we received substantially all of the assets of our predecessor in consideration of the issuance of such stock. If market conditions and other factors are satisfactory, we currently intend to apply to list our common stock for trading on a securities exchange or automated quotation system prior to the end of the second quarter of 2005. However, there can be no assurance that we will receive approval to list our common stock on any securities exchange or automated quotation system in any particular time frame or at all.

The following table sets forth the high and low sale prices of our common stock as reported by Pink Sheets LLC for the periods indicated:

The above quotations reported by Pink Sheets LLC reflect interdealer prices, which may not include retail mark-ups, mark-downs or commissions and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.

As of March 18, 2005, there were 25,376,995 shares of our common stock outstanding and approximately 8 holders of record of common stock. This number was derived from our stockholder records and does not include beneficial owners of our common stock whose shares are held in the names of various dealers, clearing agencies, banks, brokers and other fiduciaries.

We did not pay any cash dividends on our common stock for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004, and it is unlikely that we will pay any cash dividends on our common stock in the forseeable future. The payment of cash dividends on our common stock will depend on, among other things, our earnings, capital requirements and financial condition, and general business conditions. We are restricted from paying dividends on our common stock or from acquiring our capital stock by certain debt covenants contained in our senior secured credit facilities and the indenture governing our 9½% senior subordinated notes due 2012.

Each share of our Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock has a stated value of $20 and entitles the holder to an annual cumulative dividend equal to 9% of its stated value, payable semi-annually at the discretion of our board of directors in cash or in additional shares of Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock. In the event dividends are declared by our board of directors but not paid for six (6) consecutive periods, the holders of

32

Table of Contents

the Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock are entitled to vote as a separate class to elect one director to serve on our board of directors. Effective December 5, 2003, our board of directors adopted a policy of declaring dividends to the holders of the Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock under the Rotech Healthcare Inc. Employees Plan on an annual basis, with each such declaration to be made at the annual meeting of the board of directors with respect to dividends payable for the preceding year. Such policy commenced at the 2004 annual meeting of the board of directors and, in order to account for the period from the inception of the Rotech Healthcare Inc. Employees Plan to such date, the first declaration of dividends covered the preceding two years. In June 2004, dividends in the amount of $0.9 million were declared on our Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock and such dividends were paid during the first quarter of 2005.

Effective October 12, 2004, we repurchased 804 shares of our Series A convertible redeemable preferred stock for approximately $0.02 million in order to fund the cash payment of benefits under the Rotech Healthcare Inc. Employees Plan to certain plan participants that are no longer employed by us.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table summarizes information, as of December 31, 2004, with respect to shares of our common stock that may be issued under our existing equity compensation plans.

Amended and Restated Bylaws

Effective as of March 31, 2005, we amended and restated our bylaws to provide, among other things, (i) clarification regarding the procedure by which any person other than our board of directors may call a special

33

Table of Contents

meeting of stockholders, (ii) that our board of directors may, in its sole discretion, determine that a meeting of stockholders may be held solely by means of remote communication as authorized by Section 211(a)(2) of the Delaware General Corporation Law, (iii) for notice to stockholders by electronic transmission and permit action by consent of the board by electronic transmission, (iv) that no proxy will be voted or acted upon after three (3) years from its date, unless the proxy provides for a longer period, (v) that the election of directors at all meetings of the stockholders may, in the discretion of our board, be by ballot or otherwise (our bylaws previously limited the election of directors to be solely by ballot), (vi) that the authorized number of directors will be determined from time to time by resolution of our board of directors, provided that the board will consist of at least three (3) members (our bylaws previously provided that seven (7) directors will constitute the board) and (vii) clarification that a majority of all of the members of a board committee shall constitute a quorum present for the transaction of business. The foregoing description of the changes made to our bylaws is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of our amended and restated bylaws, a copy of which is filed as Exhibit 3.2 to this annual report on Form 10-K.

34

Table of Contents

ITEM 6.    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

You should read the following selected financial data along with the section captioned “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations” and the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in this report. The consolidated statement of operations data and consolidated balance sheet data for the years ended December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004 have been derived from our audited financial statements included in this report. The consolidated statement of operations data for the three months ended March 31, 2002 for our predecessor and the nine months ended December 31, 2002 for us, as the successor company, have been derived from our audited financial statements included in this report. The consolidated balance sheet data for the year ended December 31, 2002 have been derived from our audited financial statements not included in this report. The statement of operations data and balance sheet data for the years ended December 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000, have been derived from the audited financial statements of our predecessor not included in this report. Data have been presented for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and nine months ended December 31, 2002, rather than for the year ended on such date, because we had only nine months of operating results in fiscal year 2002 since our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation, emerged from bankruptcy on March 26, 2002. For all periods prior to April 1, 2002, the results of operations and other financial data set forth below refer to the business and operations of our predecessor which, upon emerging from bankruptcy, transferred substantially all of its assets to us in a restructuring transaction accounted for as of March 31, 2002. For all periods subsequent to March 31, 2002, the results of operations and other financial data refer to our business and operations, as the successor company to Rotech Medical Corporation.

35

Table of Contents

36

Table of Contents

37

Table of Contents

Reconciliation of Net Earnings (Loss) to EBITDA

38

Table of Contents

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the financial statements, related notes and other financial information appearing elsewhere in this report. In addition, see “Information Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Business—Risk Factors.” Our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation emerged from bankruptcy on March 26, 2002 and subsequently transferred substantially all of its assets to us in a restructuring transaction. The financial statements included herein reflect these transactions effective as of March 31, 2002. As used herein, unless otherwise specified or the context otherwise requires, references to “we”, “our” and “us” refer to the business and operations of Rotech Healthcare Inc. and its subsidiaries for all periods subsequent to March 31, 2002 and to the business and operations of Rotech Medical Corporation and its subsidiaries for all periods prior to April 1, 2002.

Overview

Background. We provide home medical equipment and related products and services in the United States, with a comprehensive offering of respiratory therapy and durable home medical equipment and related services. We provide equipment and services in 48 states through approximately 475 operating centers located primarily in non-urban markets.

Our revenues are principally derived from respiratory equipment rental and related services (86.6% of net revenues for the year-ended December 31, 2004), which include the rental of oxygen concentrators, liquid oxygen systems, portable oxygen systems, ventilator therapy systems, nebulizer equipment and sleep disorder breathing therapy systems, and the sale of nebulizer medications. We also generate revenues from the rental and sale of durable medical equipment (12.4% of net revenues for the year-ended December 31, 2004), including hospital beds, wheelchairs, walkers, patient aids and ancillary supplies.

We have engaged in an ongoing series of activities to strengthen our organizational structure and reposition us for future growth. These actions have included selective reduction in headcount, renegotiation of certain vendor contracts, substantial reduction in the number of billing centers, discontinuation of certain product lines and branch locations, centralization of certain administrative functions (including billing and purchasing), development and implementation of an advanced information and billing system, and enhancement of regulatory compliance programs. We expect to continue to review our operations in order to improve operating efficiencies.

Reimbursement by Third Party Payors. We derive a majority of our revenues from reimbursement by third party payors, including Medicare, Medicaid, the Veterans Administration and private insurers. In 2004, approximately 71.0% of our revenues were reimbursed under arrangements with Medicare, Medicaid and other federally-funded programs (primarily the Veterans Administration). Our business has been, and may continue to be, significantly impacted by changes mandated by Medicare legislation. With the passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, a number of changes have been mandated to the Medicare payment methodology and conditions for coverage for our products. These changes include a freeze in payments for home medical equipment from 2004 to 2008, competitive bidding requirements, new clinical conditions for payment and quality standards. The impact of competitive bidding, new clinical conditions and quality standards are uncertain at this time. The MMA changes also include a reduction in payment rates for oxygen equipment and certain other items of home medical equipment (including wheelchairs, nebulizers, hospital beds and air mattresses), based on the percentage difference between the amount of payment otherwise determined for 2002 and the median payment amount under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, or FEHBP, as determined by the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, or OIG.

As of the time of filing this annual report, the reduction in payments for oxygen and oxygen equipment had not been finalized. A September 2004 OIG report surveyed FEHBP prices for oxygen equipment and found that the median 2002 prices were considerably lower than Medicare payments for those items. On February 4, 2005,

39

Table of Contents

CMS published notice CMS-1299-N announcing a delay in the implementation of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates. The notice states that CMS was informed by the OIG that it will need to collect additional information before the FEHBP median prices for oxygen are finalized. Until such prices are established, Medicare claims for oxygen equipment furnished on or after January 1, 2005 will be paid based on the 2004 monthly payment amounts. CMS is expected to calculate and implement the lower 2005 payment amounts upon receipt of the additional information from the OIG. CMS has stated that no retroactive adjustments are to be made once the new payment amounts are set. Reductions in payment rates for 2005 established by CMS for the non-oxygen HME items subject to the FEHBP provisions range between 4% and 16%. The non-oxygen HME items subject to the Medicare price cuts accounted for approximately 2% of our recorded revenues in 2004. If the proposed reductions in the Medicare fee schedules for home oxygen equipment (as set forth in the September 2004 OIG report discussed above) together with the additional reimbursement reductions mandated by the MMA in 2005 for other home medical equipment (excluding inhalation drugs) had been implemented in 2004, we believe it would have resulted in a reduction in our 2004 recorded revenues in the range of approximately $30 million to $35 million. At this time, we cannot determine the outcome of the 2005 Medicare oxygen payment rates, the date on which the new payment amounts will become effective or the ultimate impact on our business.

MMA also revises the payment methodology for certain drugs, including inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers. Medicare-reimbursed inhalation drug therapies provided by us in 2004 accounted for approximately 17% of our recorded revenues. Prior to MMA, Medicare paid for these drugs based on average wholesale price, or AWP, as reported by drug manufacturers. Beginning January 1, 2004, Medicare payments were reduced for most of our Part B inhalation drugs to 80% of AWP from 95% of AWP, a reduction of approximately 15 percent. This reduction in Medicare payment rates for inhalation drugs reduced our revenues and operating income by approximately $24 million in 2004. As of January 1, 2005, payments for drugs delivered through nebulizer equipment are based on 106% of average sales price, or ASP. ASP is defined statutorily as the volume weighted average of manufacturers’ average sales prices, calculated by adding the manufacturers’ average sales prices for the drug in the fiscal quarter to the number of units sold and then divided by the total number of units sold for all national drug codes assigned to the product. Under the ASP methodology, Medicare generally will pay 106% of ASP for multiple source drugs and 106% of the lesser of ASP or wholesale acquisition cost for single source drugs. In addition, if the ASP exceeds the widely available market price by more than 5%, CMS may substitute the widely available market price for the ASP. ASP payment rates are calculated and updated quarterly using the most recent manufacturer data available. ASP payment amounts for our products may fluctuate from quarter to quarter, and if these payment amounts are reduced in future quarters, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. The ASP payment amounts for the first and second quarters of 2005 for many drugs, including inhalation drugs, are significantly less than the payment amounts for these drugs in 2004. For example, the payment rates, as posted by CMS, for two prevalent inhalation drugs, albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide, were reduced from $0.39 and $2.82 per milligram in 2004 to $0.065 and $0.287 for the first quarter of 2005, respectively. For the second quarter of 2005, payment rates, as posted by CMS, for albuterol sulfate and ipratropium bromide were changed to $0.090 and $0.202, respectively. Given the overall reduction in payment for inhalation drugs dispensed through nebulizers, CMS established a $57 dispensing fee for inhalation drugs shipped to a beneficiary during a 30-day period or $80 for a 90-day period. These dispensing fees may be reduced or eliminated in 2006 or beyond, and such reductions or eliminations, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations. While we have been able, based upon the increased dispensing fees, to continue offering inhalation drugs to Medicare patients in 2005, the pricing changes resulting from the ASP payment rates are expected to result in a material reduction in the revenues and profitability of our inhalation drug business and we cannot predict whether it will continue to be economically feasible for us to continue to provide inhalation drugs in the future. Reductions in Medicare reimbursement for oxygen, nebulizers and inhalation medications in 2005, many of which are expected to continue to exist for a number of years, could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and results of operations.

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of our financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles requires us to make assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and disclosure of contingencies as of the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Critical accounting policies are those that require the most complex or subjective

40

Table of Contents

judgments often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. Thus, to the extent that actual events differ from our estimates and assumptions, there could be a material impact to our financial statements. We believe that the critical accounting policies for our company are those related to revenue recognition, accounts receivable, goodwill and other intangibles.

The below listing is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all our accounting policies. In many cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is specifically dictated by generally accepted accounting principles with limited or no need for management’s judgment. There are also areas in which management’s judgment in selecting available alternatives may or may not produce a materially different result. For more information, see our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.

Revenue Recognition and Accounts Receivable

Revenues are recognized when services and related products are provided to patients and are recorded at amounts estimated to be received under reimbursement arrangements with third-party payors. Revenues derived from capitation arrangements are insignificant.

Our rental arrangements generally provide for fixed monthly payments established by fee schedules (subject to capped rentals in some instances) for as long as the patient is using the equipment and medical necessity continues. Once initial delivery is made to the patient (initial setup), a monthly billing is established based on the initial setup service date. Subsequent to our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy, at the end of each reporting period, we recognize rental arrangement revenues ratably over the monthly service period and defer revenue for the portion of the monthly bill which is unearned. No separate revenue is earned from the initial setup process. We have no lease with the patient or third-party payor, no continuing service obligation (other than oxygen refills and servicing equipment based on manufacturers’ recommendations) after the initial setup, and no refund obligation for the return of equipment after the monthly billing date.

Revenues for the sale of durable medical equipment and related supplies, including oxygen equipment, ventilators, wheelchairs, hospital beds and infusion pumps, are recognized at the time of delivery. Revenues for the sale of nebulizer medications, which are generally dispensed by our pharmacies and shipped directly to the patient’s home, are recognized at the time of shipment.

Due to the nature of the industry and the reimbursement environment in which we operate, certain estimates are required to record net revenues and accounts receivable at their net realizable values. Inherent in these estimates is the risk that they will have to be revised or updated as additional information becomes available. Specifically, the complexity of many third-party billing arrangements and the uncertainty of reimbursement amounts for certain services from certain payors may result in adjustments to amounts originally recorded. Such adjustments are typically identified and recorded at the point of cash application, claim denial or account review.

Management performs analyses to evaluate the net realizable value of accounts receivable. Specifically, management considers historical realization data, accounts receivable aging trends, other operating trends and relevant business conditions. Because of continuing changes in the healthcare industry and third-party reimbursement, it is possible that management’s estimates could change, which could have an impact on operations and cash flows.

Net Patient Service Revenues

We derive a significant portion of our revenues from the Medicare and Medicaid programs and from managed care health plans. Payments for services we render to patients covered by these programs may be less than billed charges. For Medicare and Medicaid revenues, provisions for contractual adjustments are made to reduce the charges to these patients to estimated receipts based upon the programs’ principles of payment or reimbursement (retrospectively determined). Final payment under these programs is subject to administrative review and audit, and we currently make provisions for any adjustments which may result. Our provisions for contractual allowances under managed care health plans are based primarily on payment terms. We closely

41

Table of Contents

monitor our historical collection rates as well as changes in applicable laws, rules and regulations and contract terms to help assure that provisions are made using the most accurate information we believe to be available. However, due to the complexities involved in these estimations, actual payments we receive could be different from the amounts we estimate and record.

Provision for Doubtful Accounts

Collection of receivables from third party payors and patients is our primary source of cash and is critical to our operating performance. Our primary collection risks relate to patient accounts for which the primary insurance payor has paid, but patient responsibility amounts (generally deductibles and co-payments) remain outstanding. We estimate provisions for doubtful accounts based primarily upon the age of patient’s account, the economic ability of patients to pay and the effectiveness of our collection efforts. We routinely review accounts receivable balances in conjunction with our historical collection rates and other economic conditions which might ultimately affect the collectibility of patient accounts when we consider the adequacy of the amounts we record as reserves for doubtful accounts. Significant changes in payer mix, business office operations, economic conditions or trends in federal and state governmental health care coverage could affect our collection of accounts receivable, cash flows and results of operations.

Reorganization Value in Excess of Value of Identifiable Assets—Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Reorganization value in excess of value of identifiable assets—goodwill, represents the portion of our reorganization value at March 26, 2002 that could not be attributed to specific tangible or identified intangible assets recorded in connection with the implementation of fresh-start reporting.

Goodwill and intangible assets prior to March 26, 2002, represent the excess of cost over the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in business combinations. Prior to January 1, 2002, such assets were amortized on a straight-line basis over an estimated life of approximately 20 years.

Effective January 1, 2002, we adopted the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Statement 142). Statement 142 requires that goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives no longer be amortized, but instead be tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with the provisions of Statement 142. Management has determined that branch locations have similar economic characteristics and should be aggregated into one reporting unit for assessing fair value. If the carrying amount of the goodwill and intangible asset exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized. Fair values for goodwill and intangible assets are determined based upon discounted cash flows, market multiples or appraised values as appropriate. As a result of adopting Statement 142, goodwill and a substantial amount of our intangible assets are no longer amortized. Pursuant to Statement 142, goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets must be periodically tested for impairment. We performed our annual impairment testing during our fourth quarter of each year and concluded there was no impairment of successor company goodwill or identifiable intangibles in 2002, 2003, and 2004.

Property and Equipment

Prior to March 31, 2002, property and equipment was stated at cost. Subsequent to March 31, 2002, property and equipment are stated at cost, adjusted for the impact of fresh start reporting. Patient service equipment represents medical equipment rented or held for rental to in-home patients. Patient service equipment is accounted for using a composite method, due to its characteristics of high unit volumes of relative low dollar unit cost items. Under the composite method, the purchase cost of monthly purchases of patient service equipment are capitalized and depreciated over five years using the straight-line convention, without specific physical tracking of individual items. We believe the five year depreciation period provides a proper matching of the cost of patient service equipment with the patient service revenues generated from use of the equipment, when considering the wear and tear, damage, loss and ultimately scrapping of patient service equipment over its

42

Table of Contents

life. Other property and equipment is accounted for by a specific identification system. Depreciation for other property and equipment is provided on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, seven years for furniture and office equipment, five years for vehicles, three years for computer equipment, and the shorter of the remaining lease term or the estimated useful life for leasehold improvements.

Effective April 1, 2003, we changed our estimated useful life on certain long-lived assets acquired from our predecessor, Rotech Medical Corporation. The estimated useful life of certain acquired rental property was changed from an aggregate of four years from the date acquired from our predecessor to a five-year useful life from the original acquisition date by our predecessor. The change increased depreciation expense by $42.5 million and decreased net income by approximately $23.8 million, or $0.95 per basic share and $0.94 per diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2003. The change was made to more closely match the replacement rates of rental property acquired with its specific remaining useful life.

During 2004, we undertook a project to physically count the patient service equipment within all the respective operating locations and to estimate the equipment utilized for rental within patient homes. As a result of this project, we believe that certain of the equipment acquired from our predecessor company, Rotech Medical Corporation, is no longer in service or held by us or our patients. Such equipment is presumed to have been fully depreciated prior to December 31, 2004. Accordingly, we have reduced the gross patient service equipment account and the related accumulated depreciation by $52 million. This adjustment had no impact on our results of operations in 2004.

Capitalized Software

Included in property, equipment and improvements are costs related to internally-developed and purchased software that are capitalized and amortized over periods from three to fifteen years. Capitalized costs include direct costs of materials and services incurred in developing or obtaining internal-use software and payroll and payroll-related costs for employees directly involved in the development of internal-use software. The carrying value of capitalized software is reviewed if the facts and circumstances suggest that it may be impaired. Indicators of impairment may include a subsequent change in the extent or manner in which the software is used or expected to be used, a significant change to the software is made or expected to be made or the cost to develop or modify internal-use software exceeds that expected amount. Management does not believe any impairment of our capitalized software existed at December 31, 2004.

Income Taxes

We account for income taxes under the asset and liability approach required by FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (Statement 109). For periods prior to March 31, 2002, under Statement 109, the current and deferred tax expense was allocated among the members of the IHS controlled corporate group, including our predecessor.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based upon differences between financial reporting and the tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce deferred income tax assets to amounts expected to be realized.

Contingencies

Our business is subject to extensive laws and government regulations, including those related to the Medicare and Medicaid programs. We are also subject to a Corporate Integrity Agreement with the DHHS. Non-compliance with such laws and regulations or the Corporate Integrity Agreement could subject us to severe sanctions, including penalties and fines.

FASB Statement No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, provides guidance on the application of generally accepted accounting principles related to these matters. We evaluate and record liabilities for contingencies based on known claims and legal actions when it is probable a liability has been incurred and the liability can be reasonably estimated. We believe that our accrued liabilities related to such contingencies are appropriate and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

43

Table of Contents

Fresh-Start Reporting

We adopted fresh-start reporting upon our emergence from bankruptcy, effective as of March 31, 2002. Under fresh-start reporting, our reorganization value was allocated to our assets based on their respective fair values in conformity with a method similar in nature to the purchase method of accounting for business combinations. Any portion not attributed to specific tangible or identified intangible assets are reported as an intangible asset referred to as “reorganization value in excess of value of identifiable assets—goodwill.” In adopting fresh-start reporting, we engaged an independent financial advisor to assist in the determination of the reorganization value or fair value of the entity. See “Business—Risk Factors—Since our financial statements reflect fresh-start reporting adjustments made upon our predecessor’s emergence from bankruptcy, information reflecting our results of operations and financial condition will not be comparable to prior periods of our predecessor.”

Results of Operations

The following table shows our results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2002, the nine months ended December 31, 2002 and the combined results for the predecessor company and us, as the successor company, for the year ended December 31, 2002. The calculation of the combined results for the year ended December 31, 2002 is based on an aggregation of the three months ended March 31, 2002 and the nine months ended December 31, 2002 and is for illustrative purposes only (see note 1 to the audited financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and the nine months ended December 31, 2002 and the years ended December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004 included in this report).

44

Table of Contents

The following table shows our results of operations and our results of operations as a percentage of net revenues for the years ended December 31, 2002 (combined results), 2003 and 2004.