The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of ServiceMaster and its majority-owned subsidiary partnerships, limited liability companies and corporations. All consolidated ServiceMaster subsidiaries are wholly owned. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.

Summary: The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions required under GAAP which may differ from actual results. The more significant areas requiring the use of management estimates relate to revenue recognition; the allowance for uncollectible receivables; accruals for self-insured retention limits related to medical, workers' compensation, auto and general liability insurance claims; accruals for home service contracts and termite damage claims; the possible outcome of outstanding litigation and other disputes; accruals for income tax liabilities as well as deferred tax accounts; the deferral and amortization of customer acquisition costs; useful lives for depreciation and amortization expense; the valuation of marketable securities; and the valuation of tangible and intangible assets. In 2011, there have been no changes in the significant areas that require estimates or in the underlying methodologies used in determining the amounts of these associated estimates.

The allowance for receivables is developed based on several factors including overall customer credit quality, historical write-off experience and specific account analyses that project the ultimate collectability of the outstanding balances. As such, these factors may change over time causing the reserve level to vary.

The Company carries insurance policies on insurable risks at levels which it believes to be appropriate, including workers' compensation, auto and general liability risks. The Company purchases insurance from third-party insurance carriers. These policies typically incorporate significant deductibles or self-insured retentions. The Company is responsible for all claims that fall within the retention limits. In determining the Company's accrual for self-insured claims, the Company uses historical claims experience to establish both the current year accrual and the underlying provision for future losses. This actuarially determined provision and related accrual include both known claims, as well as incurred but not reported claims. The Company adjusts its estimate of accrued self-insured claims when required to reflect changes based on factors such as changes in health care costs, accident frequency and claim severity.

Accruals for home service contract claims in the American Home Shield business are made based on the Company's claims experience and actuarial projections. Termite damage claim accruals are recorded based on both the historical rates of claims incurred within a contract year and the cost per claim. Current activity could differ causing a change in estimates. The Company has certain liabilities with respect to existing or potential claims, lawsuits, and other proceedings. The Company accrues for these liabilities when it is probable that future costs will be incurred and such costs can be reasonably estimated. Any resulting adjustments, which could be material, are recorded in the period identified.

The Company records deferred income tax balances based on the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying value of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and income tax purposes. The Company records its deferred tax items based on the estimated value of the tax basis. The Company adjusts tax estimates when required to reflect changes based on factors such as changes in tax laws, relevant court decisions, results of tax authority reviews and statutes of limitations. The Company records a liability for unrecognized tax benefits resulting from uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The Company recognizes potential interest and penalties related to its uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.

Revenue: Revenues from lawn care and pest control services, as well as liquid and fumigation termite applications, are recognized as the services are provided. The Company eradicates termites through the use of non-baiting methods (e.g., fumigation or liquid treatments) and baiting systems. Termite services using baiting systems, termite inspection and protection contracts, as well as home service contracts, are frequently sold through annual contracts for a one-time, upfront payment. Direct costs of these contracts (service costs for termite contracts and claim costs for home service contracts) are expensed as incurred. The Company recognizes revenue over the life of these contracts in proportion to the expected direct costs. Those costs bear a direct relationship to the fulfillment of the Company's obligations under the contracts and are representative of the relative value provided to the customer (proportional performance method). The Company regularly reviews its estimates of direct costs for its termite bait and home service contracts and adjusts the estimates when appropriate.

The Company has franchise agreements in its TruGreen, Terminix, ServiceMaster Clean, AmeriSpec, Furniture Medic and Merry Maids businesses. Franchise revenue (which in the aggregate represents approximately four percent of annual consolidated revenue from continuing operations) consists principally of continuing monthly fees based upon the franchisee's customer level revenue. Monthly fee revenue is recognized when the related customer level revenue is earned by the franchisee and collectability is reasonably assured. Franchise revenue also includes initial fees resulting from the sale of a franchise. These fees are fixed and are recognized as revenue when collectability is reasonably assured and all material services or conditions relating to the sale have been substantially performed. Total profits from the franchised operations were $74.1 million, $70.9 million and $66.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Consolidated operating income from continuing operations was $375.5 million, $306.7 million and $243.8 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The Company evaluates the performance of its franchise businesses based primarily on operating profit before corporate general and administrative expenses, interest expense and amortization of intangible assets. The portion of total franchise fee income related to initial fees received from the sale of a franchise was immaterial to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements for all periods.

Revenues are presented net of sales taxes collected and remitted to government taxing authorities in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations.

The Company had $473.2 million and $449.6 million of deferred revenue as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Deferred revenue consists primarily of payments received for annual contracts relating to home service contracts, termite baiting, termite inspection, pest control and lawn care services.

Deferred Customer Acquisition Costs: Customer acquisition costs, which are incremental and direct costs of obtaining a customer, are deferred and amortized over the life of the related contract in proportion to revenue recognized. These costs include sales commissions and direct selling costs which can be shown to have resulted in a successful sale. Deferred customer acquisition costs amounted to $30.4 million and $34.4 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Interim Reporting: TruGreen has significant seasonality in its business. In the winter and spring, this business sells a series of lawn applications to customers which are rendered primarily in March through October (the production season). This business incurs incremental selling expenses at the beginning of the year that directly relate to successful sales for which the revenues are recognized in later quarters. On an interim basis, TruGreen defers these incremental selling expenses, pre-season advertising costs and annual repairs and maintenance procedures that are performed primarily in the first quarter. These costs are deferred and recognized in proportion to the contract revenue over the production season and are not deferred beyond the calendar year-end. Other business segments of the Company also defer, on an interim basis, advertising costs incurred early in the year. These pre-season costs are deferred and recognized approximately in proportion to revenue over the balance of the year and are not deferred beyond the calendar year-end.

Advertising: As discussed in the "Interim Reporting" note above, certain pre-season advertising costs are deferred and recognized approximately in proportion to the revenue over the year. Certain other advertising costs are expensed when the advertising occurs. The cost of direct-response advertising at Terminix and TruGreen, consisting primarily of direct-mail promotions, is capitalized and amortized over its expected period of future benefits. Advertising expense for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 was $155.1 million, $152.5 million and $149.8 million, respectively.

Inventory: Inventories are recorded at the lower of cost (primarily on a weighted average cost basis) or market. The Company's inventory primarily consists of finished goods to be used on the customers' premises or sold to franchisees.

	Balance as of December 31,

	Balance as of December 31,						Estimated Useful Lives (Years)
(In millions)	2011			2010			Estimated Useful Lives (Years)
Land	$	22.9		$	22.9		N/A
Buildings and improvements		76.0			75.8		10 - 40
Technology and communications		207.0			152.4		3 - 7
Machinery, production equipment and vehicles		216.7			170.2		3 - 9
Office equipment, furniture and fixtures		19.2			18.7		5 - 7

		541.8			440.0
Less accumulated depreciation		(235.0	)		(173.1	)

Net property and equipment	$	306.8		$	266.9

Depreciation of property and equipment, including depreciation of assets held under capital leases, was $72.1 million, $60.6 million and $56.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Intangible assets consisted primarily of goodwill in the amount of $3.162 billion and $3.125 billion, indefinite-lived trade names in the amount of $2.334 billion and $2.370 billion, and other intangible assets in the amount of $210.0 million and $283.3 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Fixed assets and intangible assets with finite lives are depreciated and amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives. These lives are based on the Company's previous experience for similar assets, potential market obsolescence and other industry and business data. As required by accounting standards for the impairment or disposal of long- lived assets, the Company's long-lived assets, including fixed assets and intangible assets (other than goodwill), are tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. If the carrying value is no longer recoverable based upon the undiscounted future cash flows of the asset, an impairment loss would be recognized equal to the difference between the carrying amount and the fair value of the asset. Changes in the estimated useful lives or in the asset values could cause the Company to adjust its book value or future expense accordingly.

As required under accounting standards for goodwill and other intangibles, goodwill is not subject to amortization, and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives are not amortized until their useful lives are determined to no longer be indefinite. Goodwill and intangible assets that are not subject to amortization are subject to assessment for impairment by applying a fair-value based test on an annual basis or more frequently if circumstances indicate a potential impairment. The Company adopted the provisions of ASU 2011-8, "Testing Goodwill for Impairment," in the fourth quarter of 2011. This ASU gives entities the option of performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of a reporting unit in Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test. If entities determine, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of a reporting unit is more likely than not greater than its carrying amount, the two-step impairment test would not be required. For the 2011 annual goodwill impairment review performed as of October 1, 2011, the Company performed qualitative assessments on the Terminix, American Home Shield and ServiceMaster Clean reporting units. Based on these assessments, the Company determined that, more likely than not, the fair values of Terminix, American Home Shield and ServiceMaster Clean were greater than their respective carrying amounts. As a result, the two-step goodwill impairment test was not performed for Terminix, American Home Shield and ServiceMaster Clean in 2011.

As permitted under accounting standards for goodwill and other intangibles prior to the adoption of ASU 2011-08, the Company carried forward a reporting unit's valuation from the most recent valuation under the following conditions: the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit have not changed significantly since the most recent fair value calculation, the most recent fair value calculation resulted in an amount that exceeded the carrying amount of the reporting unit by a substantial margin and, based on the facts and circumstances of events that have occurred since the last fair value determination, the likelihood that a current fair value calculation would result in an impairment would be remote. For the 2010 annual goodwill impairment review performed as of October 1, 2010, the Company carried forward the valuations of the Terminix and ServiceMaster Clean reporting units completed as of October 1, 2009. The Company did not carry forward the valuations for any trade names for the 2011 or 2010 annual trade name impairment reviews. For the 2009 annual goodwill and trade name impairment reviews performed as of October 1, 2009, the Company did not carry forward the valuations of any reporting units or trade names.

Goodwill impairment is determined using a two-step process. The first step involves a comparison of the estimated fair value of each of the Company's reporting units to its carrying amount, including goodwill. In performing the first step, the Company determines the fair value of a reporting unit using a combination of a DCF analysis, a market-based comparable approach and a market-based transaction approach. Determining fair value requires the exercise of significant judgment, including judgment about appropriate discount rates, terminal growth rates, the amount and timing of expected future cash flows, as well as relevant comparable company earnings multiples for the market-based comparable approach and relevant transaction multiples for the market-based transaction approach. The cash flows employed in the DCF analyses are based on the Company's most recent budget and, for years beyond the budget, the Company's estimates, which are based on assumed growth rates. The discount rates used in the DCF analyses are intended to reflect the risks inherent in the future cash flows of the respective reporting units. In addition, the market-based comparable and transaction approaches utilize comparable company public trading values, comparable company historical results, research analyst estimates and, where available, values observed in private market transactions. If the estimated fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is not impaired and the second step of the impairment test is not necessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its estimated fair value, then the second step of the goodwill impairment test must be performed. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit's goodwill with its goodwill carrying amount to measure the amount of impairment, if any. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill recognized in a business combination. In other words, the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is allocated to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination and the fair value of the reporting unit was the purchase price paid. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit's goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment is recognized in an amount equal to that excess.

The impairment test for other intangible assets not subject to amortization involves a comparison of the estimated fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying value. If the carrying value of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. The estimates of fair value of intangible assets not subject to amortization are determined using a DCF valuation analysis. The DCF methodology used to value trade names is known as the relief from royalty method and entails identifying the hypothetical cash flows generated by an assumed royalty rate that a third party would pay to license the trade names and discounting them back to the valuation date. Significant judgments inherent in this analysis include the selection of appropriate discount rates and hypothetical royalty rates, estimating the amount and timing of estimated future cash flows attributable to the hypothetical royalty rates and identification of appropriate terminal growth rate assumptions. The discount rates used in the DCF analyses are intended to reflect the risk inherent in the projected future cash flows generated by the respective intangible assets.

Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets, primarily the Company's trade names, are assessed annually for impairment during the fourth quarter or earlier upon the occurrence of certain events or substantive changes in circumstances. The Company's 2011, 2010 and 2009 annual impairment analyses, which were performed as of October 1 of each year, did not result in any goodwill impairments. The Company's annual trade name impairment analyses, which were performed as of October 1 of each year, resulted in pre-tax non-cash impairments of $36.7 million and $26.6 million in 2011 and 2009, respectively. The Company's 2010 trade name impairment analysis did not result in any impairment. The impairment charges by business segment for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, as well as the remaining value of the trade names not subject to amortization by business segment as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:

(In thousands)	TruGreen			Terminix		American Home Shield		ServiceMaster Clean		Other Operations & Headquarters(1)			Total

Balance at Dec. 31, 2008	$	783,600		$	875,100	$	140,400	$	152,600	$	445,100		$	2,396,800
2009 Impairment		(21,400	)		—		—		—		(5,200	)		(26,600	)

Balance at Dec. 31, 2009 and 2010		762,200			875,100		140,400		152,600		439,900			2,370,200
2011 Impairment		(36,700	)		—		—		—		—			(36,700	)

Balance at Dec. 31, 2011	$	725,500		$	875,100	$	140,400	$	152,600	$	439,900		$	2,333,500

The impairment charge in 2011 was primarily attributable to the use of higher discount rates in the DCF valuation analyses as compared to the discount rates used in the 2010 impairment analyses. Although the projected future growth in cash flows in 2011 were slightly higher than in the 2010 valuation, the increase in the discount rates more than offset the improved cash flows. The increase in the discount rates is primarily attributable to changes in market conditions which indicated a lower risk tolerance in 2011 as compared to 2010. This lower risk tolerance is exhibited through the marketplace's desire for higher returns in order to accept market risk. The aggregate impairment charge in 2009 was primarily attributable to the use of lower projected future cash flows related to the hypothetical royalty rates utilized in the DCF valuation analyses as compared to the projected future cash flows used in the 2008 impairment analysis. Although the Company projected future growth in cash flows, such growth was lower than that estimated at the time the trade names were tested for impairment in 2008. The terminal growth rates used in the analyses for the October 1, 2011, 2010 and 2009 impairment tests were the same and in line with historical U.S. gross domestic product growth rates. Had the Company used a discount rate in assessing the impairment of its trade names that was one percent higher across all business segments (holding all other assumptions unchanged), the Company would have recorded an additional impairment charge of approximately $114.8 million in 2011.

As a result of the trade name impairment taken in 2011, the carrying value of the TruGreen trade name was adjusted to its estimated fair value as of October 1, 2011. Further, the October 1, 2011 estimated fair value of the trade name at the ServiceMaster Clean business segment was not significantly in excess of its carrying value. Consequently, any further decline in the estimated fair values of these trade names will result in additional trade name impairments. It is possible that such impairments, if required, could be material and may need to be recorded prior to the fourth quarter of 2012 (i.e., during an interim period) if the Company's results of operations or other factors require such assets to be tested for impairment at an interim date.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments and Credit Risk: See Note 19 for information relating to the fair value of financial instruments.

Financial instruments, which potentially subject the Company to financial and credit risk, consist principally of investments and receivables. Investments consist primarily of publicly traded debt and common equity securities. The Company periodically reviews its portfolio of investments to determine whether there has been an other than temporary decline in the value of the investments from factors such as deterioration in the financial condition of the issuer or the market(s) in which it competes. The majority of the Company's receivables have little concentration of credit risk due to the large number of customers with relatively small balances and their dispersion across geographical areas. The Company maintains an allowance for losses based upon the expected collectability of receivables.

Income Taxes: The Company is included in the consolidated U.S. federal income tax return of Holdings. State and local returns are filed both on a separate company basis and on a combined unitary basis with Holdings. Current and deferred income taxes are provided for on a separate company basis. The Company accounts for income taxes using an asset and liability approach for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in the Company's financial statements or tax returns. Deferred income taxes are provided to reflect the differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts in the financial statements. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce deferred income tax assets to the amounts expected to be realized.

The Company records a liability for unrecognized tax benefits resulting from uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be taken in its tax return. The Company recognizes potential interest and penalties related to its uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.

Stock-Based Compensation: The Company accounts for stock-based compensation under accounting standards for share based payments, which require that stock options, restricted stock units and share grants be measured at fair value and this value is recognized as compensation expense over the vesting period.

In September 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued ASU 2009-13, "Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements," which amends the multiple-element arrangement guidance under ASC 605, "Revenue Recognition." This standard amends the criteria for separating consideration received for products or services in multiple-deliverable arrangements. This standard establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, eliminates the residual method of allocation, and requires that total arrangement consideration be allocated at the inception of the arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. In addition, this standard significantly expands required disclosures related to a vendor's multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. This standard is effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010 (calendar year 2011). The Company adopted the required provisions of this standard during the first quarter of 2011. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, "Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRS." This ASU is the result of joint efforts by the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board to develop converged guidance on how to measure fair value and what disclosures to provide about fair value measurements. The ASU is largely consistent with existing fair value measurement principles in U.S. GAAP; however, it expands existing disclosure requirements for fair value measurements and makes other amendments, many of which eliminate unnecessary wording differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS. This ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011 (calendar year 2012). The Company does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material effect on its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, "Presentation of Comprehensive Income," to eliminate the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity and require that all non-owner changes in stockholders' equity be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In both options, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-12, "Comprehensive Income," to effectively defer the changes from ASU 2011-05 that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The amendments will be temporary to allow the Board time to redeliberate the presentation requirements for reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income for annual and interim financial statements. This standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011 (calendar year 2012) and must be applied retrospectively to all periods upon adoption. The Company anticipates that the adoption of this standard will change the presentation of its consolidated financial statements.

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, "Testing Goodwill for Impairment," which gives entities testing goodwill for impairment the option of performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of a reporting unit in Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test. If entities determine, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of a reporting unit is more likely than not greater than its carrying amount, the two-step impairment test would not be required. Otherwise, further testing would be needed. This ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011 (calendar year 2012). Early adoption is permitted. The Company adopted the provisions of this standard during the fourth quarter of 2011. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.