SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Policies)

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2018

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Sabra and its wholly owned subsidiaries as of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017 and for the periods ended March 31, 2018 and 2017. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information as contained within the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) and the rules and regulations of the SEC, including the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for financial statements. In the opinion of management, the financial statements for the unaudited interim periods presented include all adjustments, which are of a normal and recurring nature, necessary for a fair statement of the results for such periods. Operating results for the three months ended March 31, 2018 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2018. For further information, refer to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2017 included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 filed with the SEC.

Variable Interest Entities

GAAP requires the Company to identify entities for which control is achieved through voting rights or other means and to determine which business enterprise is the primary beneficiary of variable interest entities (“VIEs”). A VIE is broadly defined as an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance the entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group, the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about the entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests, and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. If the Company were determined to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE, the Company would consolidate investments in the VIE. The Company may change its original assessment of a VIE due to events such as modifications of contractual arrangements that affect the characteristics or adequacy of the entity’s equity investments at risk and the disposal of all or a portion of an interest held by the primary beneficiary.

The Company identifies the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both: (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits of the VIE that could be significant to the entity. The Company performs this analysis on an ongoing basis.

As of March 31, 2018, the Company determined it was the primary beneficiary of five variable interest entities—four exchange accommodation titleholder variable interest entities and a joint venture variable interest entity owning one skilled nursing/transitional care facility—and has consolidated the operations of these entities in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements. As of March 31, 2018, the Company determined that operations of these entities were not material to the Company’s results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

As it relates to investments in loans, in addition to the Company’s assessment of VIEs and whether the Company is the primary beneficiary of those VIEs, the Company evaluates the loan terms and other pertinent facts to determine whether the loan investment should be accounted for as a loan or as a real estate joint venture. If an investment has the characteristics of a real estate joint venture, including if the Company participates in the majority of the borrower’s expected residual profit, the Company would account for the investment as an investment in a real estate joint venture and not as a loan investment. Expected residual profit is defined as the amount of profit, whether called interest or another name, such as an equity kicker, above a reasonable amount of interest and fees expected to be earned by a lender. At March 31, 2018, none of the Company’s investments in loans are accounted for as real estate joint ventures.

As it relates to investments in joint ventures, the Company assesses any limited partners’ rights and their impact on the presumption of control of the limited partnership by any single partner. The Company also applies this guidance to managing member interests in limited liability companies. The Company reassesses its determination of which entity controls the joint venture if: there is a change to the terms or in the exercisability of the rights of any partners or members, the sole general partner or managing member increases or decreases its ownership interests, or there is an increase or decrease in the number of outstanding ownership interests.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the condensed consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could materially differ from those estimates.

Reclassification

Certain amounts in the Company’s consolidated financial statements for prior periods have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. These reclassifications have not changed the results of operations of prior periods. As a result, certain reclassifications were made to the condensed consolidated statements of income.

Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Venture

The Company reports investments in unconsolidated entities over whose operating and financial policies it has the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method of accounting. Under this method of accounting, the Company’s share of the investee’s earnings or losses is included in the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of income. The initial carrying value of the investment is based on the amount paid to purchase the joint venture interest. Differences between the Company’s cost basis and the basis reflected at the joint venture level are generally amortized over the lives of the related assets and liabilities, and such amortization is included in the Company’s share of earnings of the joint venture.

The Company continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of its equity method investments may not be recoverable or realized. When indicators of potential impairment are identified, the Company evaluates its equity method investments for impairment based on a comparison of the fair value of the investment to its carrying value. The fair value is estimated based on discounted cash flows that include all estimated cash inflows and outflows over a specified holding period and any estimated debt premiums or discounts. If, based on this analysis, the Company does not believe that it will be able to recover the carrying value of its equity method investment, the Company would record an impairment loss to the extent that the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value of its equity method investment.

Net Investment in Direct Financing Lease

The net investment in direct financing lease is recorded in accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other assets, net on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets and represents the total undiscounted rental payments, plus the estimated unguaranteed residual value, less the unearned lease income. Unearned lease income represents the excess of the minimum lease payments and residual value over the cost of the investment. Unearned lease income is deferred and amortized to income over the lease term to provide a constant yield when collectability of the lease payments is reasonably assured.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards Update

Adopted

Between May 2014 and May 2016, the FASB issued three Accounting Standards Updates (each, an “ASU”) changing the requirements for recognizing and reporting revenue (together, herein referred to as the “Revenue ASUs”): (i) ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASU 2014-09”), (ii) ASU No. 2016-08, Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net) (“ASU 2016-08”), (iii) ASU No. 2016-12, Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients (“ASU 2016-12”) and (iv) ASU No. 2017-05, Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets (“ASU 2017-05”). ASU 2014-09 provides guidance for revenue recognition to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2016-08 is intended to improve the operability and understandability of the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. ASU 2016-12 provides practical expedients and improvements on the previously narrow scope of ASU 2014-09. The Revenue ASUs became effective for the Company on January 1, 2018 with the Company electing to use the modified retrospective approach for its adoption. Further, the Company elected to reassess only contracts that were not completed as of the adoption date. The adoption of these ASUs did not have a material impact to beginning retained earnings as of January 1, 2018.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 provides specific guidance clarifying how certain cash receipts and payments should be classified. In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash (“ASU 2016-18”). ASU 2016-18 requires that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. The Company adopted ASU 2016-15 and ASU 2016-18 on January 1, 2018. The full retrospective approach of adoption is required for both ASUs and, accordingly, certain line items in the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. The following table illustrates changes in the Company’s cash flows as reported in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of cash flows and as previously reported prior to the adoption (in thousands):



	Three Months Ended March 31, 2017
	As Reported		As Previously Reported
Net cash provided by operating activities	31,587		31,438
Net decrease in balance	(12,721	)	(12,870	)
Balance - beginning of the year	34,665		25,663
Balance - end of the year	21,965		12,814

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities (“ASU 2017-12”). ASU 2017-12 is intended to improve the financial reporting of hedging relationships to better portray the economic results of an entity’s risk management activities in its financial statements and to simplify the application of the hedge accounting guidance in current GAAP. ASU 2017-12 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2017-12 effective beginning January 1, 2018. ASU 2017-12 requires a modified retrospective transition method in which the Company recognized the cumulative effect of the change on the opening balance of each affected component of equity in the condensed consolidated balance sheet as of the date of adoption, which resulted in a decrease to cumulative distributions in excess of net income and an increase to accumulated other comprehensive income of $0.8 million.

Issued but Not Yet Adopted

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (“ASU 2016-02”). ASU 2016-02 supersedes guidance related to accounting for leases. ASU 2016-02 updates guidance around the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases under previous GAAP. The objective of ASU 2016-02 is to establish the principles that lessees and lessors shall apply to report useful information to users of financial statements about the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from a lease. ASU 2016-02 does not fundamentally change lessor accounting; however, some changes have been made to lessor accounting to conform and align that guidance with the lessee guidance and other areas within GAAP. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. Entities currently are required to adopt the new lease requirements using a modified retrospective transition method whereby an entity initially applies the new lease requirements (subject to specific transition requirements and optional practical expedients) at the beginning of the earliest period presented in the financial statements. Upon adoption of ASU 2016-02, the Company will recognize its operating leases for which it is the lessee, mainly corporate office leases and ground leases, on its consolidated balance sheets. Further, as a result of adoption, the Company may be required to increase its revenue and expense for the amount of real estate taxes and insurance paid by its tenants under certain leasing arrangements with no net impact to net income.

In January 2018, the FASB issued a proposed amendment to ASU 2016-02 that would allow lessors to elect, as a practical expedient, not to separate lease and nonlease components (such as services rendered) in a contract for the purpose of revenue recognition and disclosure. In March 2018, the FASB voted to move forward with drafting a final ASU related to this proposed amendment. The practical expedient as proposed can only be applied to leasing arrangements for which (i) the timing and pattern of transfer are the same for the lease and nonlease components and (ii) the lease component, if accounted for separately, would be classified as an operating lease. The proposed amendment also would provide for an additional (and optional) transition method to adopt the new lease requirements by allowing entities to initially apply the requirements by recognizing a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. If finalized by the FASB, the Company plans to elect this practical expedient and apply the transition method for its operating leases for which the Company is the lessee. The Company is still evaluating the full impact of the adoption of ASU 2016-02 on January 1, 2019 to its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 requires that a financial asset (or a group of financial assets) measured at amortized cost basis be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. The allowance for credit losses is a valuation account that is deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial asset(s) to present the net carrying value at the amount expected to be collected on the financial asset. The amendments in ASU 2016-13 are an improvement because they eliminate the probable initial recognition threshold in current GAAP and, instead, reflect an entity’s current estimate of all expected credit losses. Previously, when credit losses were measured under GAAP, an entity generally only considered past events and current conditions in measuring the incurred loss. ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted as of the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. An entity will apply the amendments in this update through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (that is, a modified-retrospective approach). The Company is currently evaluating the impact this guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements when adopted.

Fair Value Disclosures

The fair value for certain financial instruments is derived using a combination of market quotes, pricing models and other valuation techniques that involve significant management judgment. The price transparency of financial instruments is a key determinant of the degree of judgment involved in determining the fair value of the Company’s financial instruments.

Financial instruments for which actively quoted prices or pricing parameters are available and whose markets contain orderly transactions will generally have a higher degree of price transparency than financial instruments whose markets are inactive or consist of non-orderly trades. The Company evaluates several factors when determining if a market is inactive or when market transactions are not orderly. The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and the Credit Facility are reasonable estimates of fair value because of the short-term maturities of these instruments. Fair values for other financial instruments are derived as follows:

Loans receivable: These instruments are presented on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets at their amortized cost and not at fair value. The fair values of the loans receivable were estimated using an internal valuation model that considered the expected cash flows for the loans receivable, as well as the underlying collateral value and other credit enhancements as applicable. As such, the Company classifies these instruments as Level 3.

Preferred equity investments: These instruments are presented on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets at their cost and not at fair value. The fair values of the preferred equity investments were estimated using an internal valuation model that considered the expected future cash flows for the preferred equity investment, the underlying collateral value and other credit enhancements. As such, the Company classifies these instruments as Level 3.

Derivative instruments: The Company’s derivative instruments are presented at fair value on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. The Company estimates the fair value of derivative instruments, including its interest rate swaps and cross currency swaps, using the assistance of a third party using inputs that are observable in the market, which include forward yield curves and other relevant information. Although the Company has determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its derivative financial instruments fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with its derivative financial instruments utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads, to evaluate the likelihood of default by itself and its counterparties. The Company has assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its derivative positions and has determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation of its derivative financial instruments. As a result, the Company has determined that its derivative financial instruments valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Senior Notes: These instruments are presented on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets at their outstanding principal balance, net of unamortized deferred financing costs and premiums/discounts and not at fair value. The fair values of the Senior Notes were determined using third-party market quotes derived from orderly trades. As such, the Company classifies these instruments as Level 2.

Secured indebtedness: These instruments are presented on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets at their outstanding principal balance, net of unamortized deferred financing costs and premiums/discounts and not at fair value. The fair values of the Company’s secured debt were estimated using a discounted cash flow analysis based on management’s estimates of current market interest rates for instruments with similar characteristics, including remaining loan term, loan-to-value ratio, type of collateral and other credit enhancements. As such, the Company classifies these instruments as Level 3.