Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Regulatory Matters — Laws and regulations governing Medicare and Medicaid programs are complex and subject to interpretation. Compliance with such laws and regulations can be subject to future governmental review and interpretation, as well as significant regulatory action including fines, penalties, and exclusion from certain governmental programs. Included in these laws and regulations is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), which requires healthcare providers (among other things) to safeguard the privacy and security of certain health information. In late December of 2016, the Company learned of a potential issue at one of its independent operating entities in Arizona which involved the limited and inadvertent disclosure of certain confidential information. The issue has been internally investigated, addressed and disclosed as is required by law. The Company believes that it is presently in compliance in all material respects with applicable HIPAA laws and regulations. Cost-Containment Measures — Both government and private pay sources have instituted cost-containment measures designed to limit payments made to providers of healthcare services, and there can be no assurance that future measures designed to limit payments made to providers will not adversely affect the Company. Indemnities — From time to time, the Company enters into certain types of contracts that contingently require the Company to indemnify parties against third-party claims. These contracts primarily include (i) certain real estate leases, under which the Company may be required to indemnify property owners or prior facility operators for post-transfer environmental or other liabilities and other claims arising from the Company’s use of the applicable premises, (ii) operations transfer agreements, in which the Company agrees to indemnify past operators of facilities the Company acquires against certain liabilities arising from the transfer of the operation and/or the operation thereof after the transfer by the Company's independent operating subsidiary, (iii) certain lending agreements, under which the Company may be required to indemnify the lender against various claims and liabilities, and (iv) certain agreements with the Company’s officers, directors and employees, under which the Company may be required to indemnify such persons for liabilities arising out of their employment relationships. The terms of such obligations vary by contract and, in most instances, do not expressly state or include a specific or maximum dollar amount. Generally, amounts under these contracts cannot be reasonably estimated until a specific claim is asserted. Consequently, because no claims have been asserted, no liabilities have been recorded for these obligations on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets for any of the periods presented. U.S. Department of Justice Civil Investigative Demand - On May 31, 2018, the Company received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the U.S. Department of Justice stating that it is investigating the Company to determine whether the Company has violated the False Claims Act and/or the Anti-Kickback Statute with respect to the relationships between certain of the Company’s independently operating skilled nursing facilities and persons who served as medical directors, advisory board participants or other referral sources. The CID covered the period from October 3, 2013 to the present, and was limited in scope to ten of the Company’s Southern California independent operating entities. In October 2018, the Department of Justice made an additional request for information covering the period of January 1, 2011 to the present, relating to the same topic. As a general matter, the Company’s independent operating entities maintain policies and procedures to promote compliance with the False Claims Act, the Anti-Kickback Statute, and other applicable regulatory requirements. The Company is fully cooperating with the U.S. Department of Justice to promptly respond to the requests for information. However, the Company cannot predict when the investigation will be resolved, the outcome of the investigation or its potential impact on the Company. Litigation — The skilled nursing business involves a significant risk of liability given the age and health of the patients and residents served by the Company's independent operating subsidiaries. The Company, its independent operating subsidiaries, and others in the industry are subject to an increasing number of claims and lawsuits, including professional liability claims, alleging that services provided have resulted in personal injury, elder abuse, wrongful death or other related claims. The defense of these lawsuits may result in significant legal costs, regardless of the outcome, and can result in large settlement amounts or damage awards. In addition to the potential lawsuits and claims described above, the Company is also subject to potential lawsuits under the Federal False Claims Act and comparable state laws alleging submission of fraudulent claims for services to any healthcare program (such as Medicare) or payor. A violation may provide the basis for exclusion from federally-funded healthcare programs. Such exclusions could have a correlative negative impact on the Company’s financial performance. Some states, including California, Arizona and Texas, have enacted similar whistleblower and false claims laws and regulations. In addition, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 created incentives for states to enact anti-fraud legislation modeled on the Federal False Claims Act. As such, the Company could face increased scrutiny, potential liability and legal expenses and costs based on claims under state false claims acts in markets in which its independent operating subsidiaries do business. In May 2009, Congress passed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA) which made significant changes to the Federal False Claims Act (FCA) and, expanded the types of activities subject to prosecution and whistleblower liability. Following changes by FERA, health care providers face significant penalties for the knowing retention of government overpayments, even if no false claim was involved. Health care providers can now be liable for knowingly and improperly avoiding or decreasing an obligation to pay money or property to the government. This includes the retention of any government overpayment. The government can argue, therefore, that a FCA violation can occur without any affirmative fraudulent action or statement, as long as it is knowingly improper. In addition, FERA extended protections against retaliation for whistleblowers, including protections not only for employees, but also contractors and agents. Thus, an employment relationship is generally not required in order to qualify for protection against retaliation for whistleblowing. Healthcare litigation (including class action litigation) is common and is filed based upon a wide variety of claims and theories, and the Company's independent operating subsidiaries are routinely subjected to varying types of claims. One particular type of suit arises from alleged violations of minimum staffing requirements for skilled nursing facilities in those states which have enacted such requirements. Failure to meet these requirements can, among other things, jeopardize a facility's compliance with conditions of participation under certain state and federal healthcare programs; it may also subject the facility to a deficiency, a citation, a civil money penalty, or litigation. These class-action “staffing” suits have the potential to result in large jury verdicts and settlements. The Company expects the plaintiffs' bar to continue to be aggressive in their pursuit of these staffing and similar claims. The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have in the past been subject to class action litigation involving claims of alleged violations of regulatory requirements related to staffing. While the Company has been able to settle these claims without a material ongoing adverse effect on its business, future claims could be brought that may materially affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Other claims and suits, including class actions, continue to be filed against the Company and other companies in its industry. If there were a significant increase in the number of these claims or an increase in amounts due as a result of these claims, this could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have been, and continue to be, subject to claims and legal actions that arise in the ordinary course of business, including potential claims related to patient care and treatment, as well as employment related claims. A significant increase in the number of these claims, or an increase in the amounts due as a result of these claims, could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In August of 2011, the Company was named as a Defendant in a class action litigation alleging violations of state and federal wage and hour law. In January of 2017, the Company participated in an initial mediation session with plaintiffs' counsel. As a result of this discussion and due to (i) the fact no class had been certified (ii) the lack of specificity as to legal theories put forth by the plaintiffs (iii) the nature of the remedies sought and (iv) the lack of any basis on which to compute estimated compensatory and/or exemplary damages, the Company could not predict what the outcome of the pending class action lawsuit would be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of this lawsuit would be, or an estimate and/or range of possible loss related to it. In March of 2017, the Company was invited to engage in further settlement discussions to determine whether a resolution of the case was possible in advance of a decision on class certification. In April of 2017, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the subject class action litigation, without any admission of liability and subject to approval by the California Superior Court. Based upon the change in case status, the Company recorded an accrual for estimated probable losses of $11,000, exclusive of legal fees, in the first quarter of 2017. The Company funded the settlement amount of $11,000 in December of 2017, and the funds were distributed to the class members in the first quarter of 2018. The Company received $1,664 related to unclaimed class settlement funds remaining after completion of the settlement process, and the recoveries were recorded in the first quarter of 2018. Other claims and suits continue to be filed against the Company and other post-acute care providers. By way of example, a general/premises liability lawsuit was filed against one of the Company’s independent operating entities, in connection with an alleged injury to a non-employee/contractor. In addition, professional negligence claims have been filed and will likely continue to be filed against the Company's independent operating entities by residents or resident responsible parties. The Company cannot predict or provide any assurance as to the possible outcome of any inquiry, investigation or litigation. If any litigation were to proceed through trial, and the Company and its independent operating subsidiaries are subjected to, alleged to be liable for, or agree to a settlement of, claims or obligations under Federal Medicare statutes, the Federal False Claims Act, or similar State and Federal statutes and related regulations, or if the Company or its independent operating subsidiaries are alleged or found to be liable on theories of general or professional negligence, the Company's business, financial condition and results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected and its stock price could be adversely impacted. Among other things, any settlement or litigation could involve the payment of substantial sums to settle any alleged civil violations, and may also include the assumption of specific procedural and financial obligations by the Company or its subsidiaries going forward under a corporate integrity agreement and/or other arrangements. Medicare Revenue Recoupments — The Company's independent operating entities are subject to regulatory reviews relating to Medicare services, billings and potential overpayments as a result of Recovery Audit Contractors (RAC), Zone Program Integrity Contractors (ZPIC), Program Safeguard Contractors (PSC), Unified Program Integrity Contractors (UPIC) and Medicaid Integrity Contributors (MIC) programs, collectively referred to as "Reviews." As of December 31, 2018, 16 of the Company's independent operating subsidiaries had Reviews scheduled, on appeal, or in a dispute resolution process, both pre- and post-payment. The Company anticipates that these Reviews will increase in frequency in the future. If an operation fails a Review and/or subsequent Reviews, the operation could then be subject to extended review or an extrapolation of the identified error rate to billings in the same time period. As of December 31, 2018, the Company's independent operating subsidiaries have responded to the requests and the related claims are currently under Review, on appeal or in a dispute resolution process. U.S. Government Inquiry and Corporate Integrity Agreement — In October 2013, the Company completed and executed a settlement agreement (the Settlement Agreement) with the DOJ, which received the final approval of the Office of Inspector General-HHS and the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Company made a single lump-sum remittance to the government in the amount of $48,000 in October 2013. The Company has denied engaging in any illegal conduct and has agreed to the settlement amount without any admission of wrongdoing in order to resolve the allegations and to avoid the uncertainty and expense of protracted litigation. In connection with the settlement and effective as of October 1, 2013, the Company entered into a five-year corporate integrity agreement (the CIA) with the Office of Inspector General-HHS. The CIA acknowledges the existence of the Company’s current compliance program, which is in accord with the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)’s guidance related to an effective compliance program, and requires that the Company continue during the term of the CIA to maintain a program designed to promote compliance with the statutes, regulations, and written directives of Medicare, Medicaid, and all other Federal health care programs. The Company is also required to notify the Office of Inspector General-HHS in writing, of, among other things: (i) any ongoing government investigation or legal proceeding involving an allegation that the Company has committed a crime or has engaged in fraudulent activities; (ii) any other matter that a reasonable person would consider a probable violation of applicable criminal, civil, or administrative laws related to compliance with federal healthcare programs; and (iii) any change in location, sale, closing, purchase, or establishment of a new business unit or location related to items or services that may be reimbursed by federal health care programs. The Company is also required to retain an Independent Review Organization (IRO) to review certain clinical documentation annually for the term of the CIA. The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have continued to meet the requirements under the Settlement Agreement and CIA, and pass its IRO audits. Participation in federal healthcare programs by the Company's independent operating subsidiaries is not affected by the Settlement Agreement or the CIA. In the event of an uncured material breach of the CIA, the Company's independent operating subsidiaries could be excluded from participation in federal healthcare programs and/or subject to prosecution. Concentrations Credit Risk — The Company has significant accounts receivable balances, the collectability of which is dependent on the availability of funds from certain governmental programs, primarily Medicare and Medicaid. These receivables represent the only significant concentration of credit risk for the Company. The Company does not believe there are significant credit risks associated with these governmental programs. The Company believes that an appropriate allowance has been recorded for the possibility of these receivables proving uncollectible, and continually monitors and adjusts these allowances as necessary. The Company’s receivables from Medicare and Medicaid payor programs accounted for approximately 60.6% and 56.7% of its total accounts receivable as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Revenue from reimbursement under the Medicare and Medicaid programs accounted for 68.5%, 68.4% and 67.8% of the Company's revenue for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Cash in Excess of FDIC Limits — The Company currently has bank deposits with financial institutions in the U.S. that exceed FDIC insurance limits. FDIC insurance provides protection for bank deposits up to $250. In addition, the Company has uninsured bank deposits with a financial institution outside the U.S. As of February 4, 2019, the Company had approximately $593 in uninsured cash deposits. All uninsured bank deposits are held at high quality credit institutions.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Regulatory Matters — Laws and regulations governing Medicare and Medicaid programs are complex and subject to interpretation. Compliance with such laws and regulations can be subject to future governmental review and interpretation, as well as significant regulatory action including fines, penalties, and exclusion from certain governmental programs. Included in these laws and regulations is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), which requires healthcare providers (among other things) to safeguard the privacy and security of certain health information. In late December of 2016, the Company learned of a potential issue at one of its independent operating entities in Arizona which involved the limited and inadvertent disclosure of certain confidential information. The issue has been internally investigated, addressed and disclosed as is required by law. The Company believes that it is presently in compliance in all material respects with applicable HIPAA laws and regulations.

Cost-Containment Measures — Both government and private pay sources have instituted cost-containment measures designed to limit payments made to providers of healthcare services, and there can be no assurance that future measures designed to limit payments made to providers will not adversely affect the Company.

Indemnities — From time to time, the Company enters into certain types of contracts that contingently require the Company to indemnify parties against third-party claims. These contracts primarily include (i) certain real estate leases, under which the Company may be required to indemnify property owners or prior facility operators for post-transfer environmental or other liabilities and other claims arising from the Company’s use of the applicable premises, (ii) operations transfer agreements, in which the Company agrees to indemnify past operators of facilities the Company acquires against certain liabilities arising from the transfer of the operation and/or the operation thereof after the transfer by the Company's independent operating subsidiary, (iii) certain lending agreements, under which the Company may be required to indemnify the lender against various claims and liabilities, and (iv) certain agreements with the Company’s officers, directors and employees, under which the Company may be required to indemnify such persons for liabilities arising out of their employment relationships. The terms of such obligations vary by contract and, in most instances, do not expressly state or include a specific or maximum dollar amount. Generally, amounts under these contracts cannot be reasonably estimated until a specific claim is asserted. Consequently, because no claims have been asserted, no liabilities have been recorded for these obligations on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets for any of the periods presented.

U.S. Department of Justice Civil Investigative Demand - On May 31, 2018, the Company received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the U.S. Department of Justice stating that it is investigating the Company to determine whether the Company has violated the False Claims Act and/or the Anti-Kickback Statute with respect to the relationships between certain of the Company’s independently operating skilled nursing facilities and persons who served as medical directors, advisory board participants or other referral sources. The CID covered the period from October 3, 2013 to the present, and was limited in scope to ten of the Company’s Southern California independent operating entities. In October 2018, the Department of Justice made an additional request for information covering the period of January 1, 2011 to the present, relating to the same topic. As a general matter, the Company’s independent operating entities maintain policies and procedures to promote compliance with the False Claims Act, the Anti-Kickback Statute, and other applicable regulatory requirements. The Company is fully cooperating with the U.S. Department of Justice to promptly respond to the requests for information. However, the Company cannot predict when the investigation will be resolved, the outcome of the investigation or its potential impact on the Company.

Litigation — The skilled nursing business involves a significant risk of liability given the age and health of the patients and residents served by the Company's independent operating subsidiaries. The Company, its independent operating subsidiaries, and others in the industry are subject to an increasing number of claims and lawsuits, including professional liability claims, alleging that services provided have resulted in personal injury, elder abuse, wrongful death or other related claims. The defense of these lawsuits may result in significant legal costs, regardless of the outcome, and can result in large settlement amounts or damage awards.

In addition to the potential lawsuits and claims described above, the Company is also subject to potential lawsuits under the Federal False Claims Act and comparable state laws alleging submission of fraudulent claims for services to any healthcare program (such as Medicare) or payor. A violation may provide the basis for exclusion from federally-funded healthcare programs. Such exclusions could have a correlative negative impact on the Company’s financial performance. Some states, including California, Arizona and Texas, have enacted similar whistleblower and false claims laws and regulations. In addition, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 created incentives for states to enact anti-fraud legislation modeled on the Federal False Claims Act. As such, the Company could face increased scrutiny, potential liability and legal expenses and costs based on claims under state false claims acts in markets in which its independent operating subsidiaries do business.

In May 2009, Congress passed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act (FERA) which made significant changes to the Federal False Claims Act (FCA) and, expanded the types of activities subject to prosecution and whistleblower liability. Following changes by FERA, health care providers face significant penalties for the knowing retention of government overpayments, even if no false claim was involved. Health care providers can now be liable for knowingly and improperly avoiding or decreasing an obligation to pay money or property to the government. This includes the retention of any government overpayment. The government can argue, therefore, that a FCA violation can occur without any affirmative fraudulent action or statement, as long as it is knowingly improper. In addition, FERA extended protections against retaliation for whistleblowers, including protections not only for employees, but also contractors and agents. Thus, an employment relationship is generally not required in order to qualify for protection against retaliation for whistleblowing.

Healthcare litigation (including class action litigation) is common and is filed based upon a wide variety of claims and theories, and the Company's independent operating subsidiaries are routinely subjected to varying types of claims. One particular type of suit arises from alleged violations of minimum staffing requirements for skilled nursing facilities in those states which have enacted such requirements. Failure to meet these requirements can, among other things, jeopardize a facility's compliance with conditions of participation under certain state and federal healthcare programs; it may also subject the facility to a deficiency, a citation, a civil money penalty, or litigation. These class-action “staffing” suits have the potential to result in large jury verdicts and settlements. The Company expects the plaintiffs' bar to continue to be aggressive in their pursuit of these staffing and similar claims.

The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have in the past been subject to class action litigation involving claims of alleged violations of regulatory requirements related to staffing. While the Company has been able to settle these claims without a material ongoing adverse effect on its business, future claims could be brought that may materially affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Other claims and suits, including class actions, continue to be filed against the Company and other companies in its industry. If there were a significant increase in the number of these claims or an increase in amounts due as a result of these claims, this could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have been, and continue to be, subject to claims and legal actions that arise in the ordinary course of business, including potential claims related to patient care and treatment, as well as employment related claims. A significant increase in the number of these claims, or an increase in the amounts due as a result of these claims, could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In August of 2011, the Company was named as a Defendant in a class action litigation alleging violations of state and federal wage and hour law. In January of 2017, the Company participated in an initial mediation session with plaintiffs' counsel. As a result of this discussion and due to (i) the fact no class had been certified (ii) the lack of specificity as to legal theories put forth by the plaintiffs (iii) the nature of the remedies sought and (iv) the lack of any basis on which to compute estimated compensatory and/or exemplary damages, the Company could not predict what the outcome of the pending class action lawsuit would be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of this lawsuit would be, or an estimate and/or range of possible loss related to it.

In March of 2017, the Company was invited to engage in further settlement discussions to determine whether a resolution of the case was possible in advance of a decision on class certification. In April of 2017, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the subject class action litigation, without any admission of liability and subject to approval by the California Superior Court. Based upon the change in case status, the Company recorded an accrual for estimated probable losses of $11,000, exclusive of legal fees, in the first quarter of 2017. The Company funded the settlement amount of $11,000 in December of 2017, and the funds were distributed to the class members in the first quarter of 2018. The Company received $1,664 related to unclaimed class settlement funds remaining after completion of the settlement process, and the recoveries were recorded in the first quarter of 2018.

Other claims and suits continue to be filed against the Company and other post-acute care providers. By way of example, a general/premises liability lawsuit was filed against one of the Company’s independent operating entities, in connection with an alleged injury to a non-employee/contractor. In addition, professional negligence claims have been filed and will likely continue to be filed against the Company's independent operating entities by residents or resident responsible parties.

The Company cannot predict or provide any assurance as to the possible outcome of any inquiry, investigation or litigation. If any litigation were to proceed through trial, and the Company and its independent operating subsidiaries are subjected to, alleged to be liable for, or agree to a settlement of, claims or obligations under Federal Medicare statutes, the Federal False Claims Act, or similar State and Federal statutes and related regulations, or if the Company or its independent operating subsidiaries are alleged or found to be liable on theories of general or professional negligence, the Company's business, financial condition and results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected and its stock price could be adversely impacted. Among other things, any settlement or litigation could involve the payment of substantial sums to settle any alleged civil violations, and may also include the assumption of specific procedural and financial obligations by the Company or its subsidiaries going forward under a corporate integrity agreement and/or other arrangements.

Medicare Revenue Recoupments — The Company's independent operating entities are subject to regulatory reviews relating to Medicare services, billings and potential overpayments as a result of Recovery Audit Contractors (RAC), Zone Program Integrity Contractors (ZPIC), Program Safeguard Contractors (PSC), Unified Program Integrity Contractors (UPIC) and Medicaid Integrity Contributors (MIC) programs, collectively referred to as "Reviews." As of December 31, 2018, 16 of the Company's independent operating subsidiaries had Reviews scheduled, on appeal, or in a dispute resolution process, both pre- and post-payment. The Company anticipates that these Reviews will increase in frequency in the future. If an operation fails a Review and/or subsequent Reviews, the operation could then be subject to extended review or an extrapolation of the identified error rate to billings in the same time period. As of December 31, 2018, the Company's independent operating subsidiaries have responded to the requests and the related claims are currently under Review, on appeal or in a dispute resolution process.

U.S. Government Inquiry and Corporate Integrity Agreement — In October 2013, the Company completed and executed a settlement agreement (the Settlement Agreement) with the DOJ, which received the final approval of the Office of Inspector General-HHS and the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Company made a single lump-sum remittance to the government in the amount of $48,000 in October 2013. The Company has denied engaging in any illegal conduct and has agreed to the settlement amount without any admission of wrongdoing in order to resolve the allegations and to avoid the uncertainty and expense of protracted litigation.

In connection with the settlement and effective as of October 1, 2013, the Company entered into a five-year corporate integrity agreement (the CIA) with the Office of Inspector General-HHS. The CIA acknowledges the existence of the Company’s current compliance program, which is in accord with the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)’s guidance related to an effective compliance program, and requires that the Company continue during the term of the CIA to maintain a program designed to promote compliance with the statutes, regulations, and written directives of Medicare, Medicaid, and all other Federal health care programs. The Company is also required to notify the Office of Inspector General-HHS in writing, of, among other things: (i) any ongoing government investigation or legal proceeding involving an allegation that the Company has committed a crime or has engaged in fraudulent activities; (ii) any other matter that a reasonable person would consider a probable violation of applicable criminal, civil, or administrative laws related to compliance with federal healthcare programs; and (iii) any change in location, sale, closing, purchase, or establishment of a new business unit or location related to items or services that may be reimbursed by federal health care programs. The Company is also required to retain an Independent Review Organization (IRO) to review certain clinical documentation annually for the term of the CIA.

The Company and its independent operating subsidiaries have continued to meet the requirements under the Settlement Agreement and CIA, and pass its IRO audits. Participation in federal healthcare programs by the Company's independent operating subsidiaries is not affected by the Settlement Agreement or the CIA. In the event of an uncured material breach of the CIA, the Company's independent operating subsidiaries could be excluded from participation in federal healthcare programs and/or subject to prosecution.

Concentrations

Credit Risk — The Company has significant accounts receivable balances, the collectability of which is dependent on the availability of funds from certain governmental programs, primarily Medicare and Medicaid. These receivables represent the only significant concentration of credit risk for the Company. The Company does not believe there are significant credit risks associated with these governmental programs. The Company believes that an appropriate allowance has been recorded for the possibility of these receivables proving uncollectible, and continually monitors and adjusts these allowances as necessary. The Company’s receivables from Medicare and Medicaid payor programs accounted for approximately 60.6% and 56.7% of its total accounts receivable as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Revenue from reimbursement under the Medicare and Medicaid programs accounted for 68.5%, 68.4% and 67.8% of the Company's revenue for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Cash in Excess of FDIC Limits — The Company currently has bank deposits with financial institutions in the U.S. that exceed FDIC insurance limits. FDIC insurance provides protection for bank deposits up to $250. In addition, the Company has uninsured bank deposits with a financial institution outside the U.S. As of February 4, 2019, the Company had approximately $593 in uninsured cash deposits. All uninsured bank deposits are held at high quality credit institutions.