Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies The majority of the Company’s revenues are from government programs and may be subject to adjustment as a result of: (i) examination by government agencies or contractors, for which the resolution of any matters raised may take extended periods of time to finalize; (ii) differing interpretations of government regulations by different Medicare contractors or regulatory authorities; (iii) differing opinions regarding a patient’s medical diagnosis or the medical necessity of services provided; and (iv) retroactive applications or interpretations of governmental requirements. In addition, the Company’s revenues from commercial payors may be subject to adjustment as a result of potential claims for refunds, as a result of government actions or as a result of other claims by commercial payors. The Company operates in a highly regulated industry and is a party to various lawsuits, claims, qui tam suits, governmental investigations and audits (including investigations resulting from its obligation to self-report suspected violations of law) and other legal proceedings. The Company records accruals for certain legal proceedings and regulatory matters to the extent that the Company determines an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company’s total recorded accruals, including DMG, with respect to legal proceedings and regulatory matters, net of anticipated third party recoveries, were approximately $6,000 and $69,000, respectively. While these accruals reflect the Company’s best estimate of the probable loss for those matters as of the dates of those accruals, the recorded amounts may differ materially from the actual amount of the losses for those matters, and any anticipated third party recoveries for any such losses may not ultimately be recoverable. Additionally, in some cases, no estimate of the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, if any, can be made because of the inherently unpredictable nature of legal proceedings and regulatory matters, which also may be impacted by various factors, including that they may involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages or may involve fines, penalties or non-monetary remedies; present novel legal theories or legal uncertainties; involve disputed facts; represent a shift in regulatory policy; are in the early stages of the proceedings; or result in a change of business practices. Further, there may be various levels of judicial review available to the Company in connection with any such proceeding. The following is a description of certain lawsuits, claims, governmental investigations and audits and other legal proceedings to which the Company is subject. Inquiries by the Federal Government and Certain Related Civil Proceedings 2015 U.S. Office of Inspector General (OIG) Medicare Advantage Civil Investigation: In March 2015, JSA HealthCare Corporation (JSA), a subsidiary of DMG, received a subpoena from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requesting documents and information for the period from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2013, for certain MA plans for which JSA provided services. It also requests information regarding JSA’s communications about patient diagnoses as they relate to certain MA plans generally, and more specifically as related to two Florida physicians with whom JSA previously contracted. The Company is producing the requested information and is cooperating with the government’s investigation. In addition to the subpoena described above, in June 2015, the Company received a civil subpoena from the OIG covering the period from January 1, 2008 through the present and seeking production of a wide range of documents relating to the Company’s and its subsidiaries’ (including DMG’s and its subsidiary JSA’s) provision of services to MA plans and related patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment submissions and payments. The Company believes that the request is part of a broader industry investigation into MA patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment practices and potential overpayments by the government. The information requested includes information relating to patient diagnosis coding practices for a number of conditions, including potentially improper historical DMG coding for a particular condition. With respect to that condition, the guidance related to that coding issue was discontinued following the Company’s November 1, 2012 acquisition of HealthCare Partners (now known as the Company's DMG business), and the Company notified CMS in April 2015 of the coding practice and potential overpayments. In that regard, the Company has identified certain additional coding practices which may have been problematic, some of which were the subject of the Swoben Private Civil Suit, and is in discussions with the DOJ relating to those practices. The Company is cooperating with the government. In addition, the Company is continuing to review other DMG coding practices to determine whether there were any improper coding issues. In connection with the Company's acquisition of DMG in 2012, the Company has certain indemnification rights against the sellers and an escrow was established as security for the indemnification. The Company has submitted an indemnification claim against the sellers secured by the escrow for any and all liabilities incurred relating to these matters and intends to pursue recovery from the escrow. However, the Company can make no assurances that the indemnification and escrow will cover the full amount of the Company’s potential losses related to these matters. 2016 U.S. Attorney Prescription Drug Investigation: In early February 2016, the Company announced that its pharmacy services’ wholly-owned subsidiary, DaVita Rx, received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas. The government is conducting a federal False Claims Act (FCA) investigation concerning allegations that DaVita Rx presented or caused to be presented false claims for payment to the government for prescription medications, as well as into the Company’s relationship with pharmaceutical manufacturers. The CID covers the period from January 1, 2006 through the present. In the spring of 2015, the Company initiated an internal compliance review of DaVita Rx during which it identified potential billing and operational issues, including potential write-offs and discounts of patient co-payment obligations, and credits to payors for returns of prescription drugs related to DaVita Rx. The Company notified the government in September 2015 that it was conducting this review of DaVita Rx and began providing regular updates of its review. Upon completion of its review, the Company filed a self-disclosure with the OIG in February 2016 and has been working to address and update the practices it identified in the self-disclosure, some of which overlap with information requested by the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The OIG informed the Company in February 2016 that its submission was not accepted. They indicated that the OIG is not expressing an opinion regarding the conduct disclosed or the Company’s legal positions. In connection with the Company’s ongoing efforts working with the government the Company learned that a qui tam complaint had been filed covering some of the issues in the CID and the Company’s self-disclosure. In December 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the government and relators in the qui tam matter and that included total monetary consideration of $63,700, as previously announced, of which $41,500 was an incremental cash payment and $22,200 was for amounts previously refunded, and all of which was previously accrued. The government’s investigation into the Company's relationship with pharmaceutical manufacturers is ongoing and the Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation. 2017 U.S. Attorney American Kidney Fund Investigation: On January 4, 2017, the Company was served with an administrative subpoena for records by the United States Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts, relating to an investigation into possible federal health care offenses. The subpoena covers the period from January 1, 2007 through the present, and seeks documents relevant to charitable patient assistance organizations, particularly the American Kidney Fund, including documents related to efforts to provide patients with information concerning the availability of charitable assistance. The Company is cooperating with the government and is producing the requested information. * * * Although the Company cannot predict whether or when proceedings might be initiated or when these matters may be resolved (other than as described above), it is not unusual for inquiries such as these to continue for a considerable period of time through the various phases of document and witness requests and on-going discussions with regulators. In addition to the inquiries and proceedings specifically identified above, the Company is frequently subject to other inquiries by state or federal government agencies and/or private civil qui tam complaints filed by relators. Negative findings or terms and conditions that the Company might agree to accept as part of a negotiated resolution of pending or future government inquiries or relator proceedings could result in, among other things, substantial financial penalties or awards against the Company, substantial payments made by the Company, harm to the Company’s reputation, required changes to the Company’s business practices, exclusion from future participation in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs and, if criminal proceedings were initiated against the Company, possible criminal penalties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company. Shareholder Claims Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia Securities Class Action Civil Suit: On February 1, 2017, the Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia filed a putative federal securities class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and certain executives. The complaint covers the time period of August 2015 to October 2016 and alleges, generally, that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws concerning the Company’s financial results and revenue derived from patients who received charitable premium assistance from an industry-funded non-profit organization. The complaint further alleges that the process by which patients obtained commercial insurance and received charitable premium assistance was improper and "created a false impression of DaVita’s business and operational status and future growth prospects." In November 2017, the court appointed the lead plaintiff and an amended complaint was filed on January 12, 2018. The Company's response is due March 13, 2018. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly. In re DaVita Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation: On August 15, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware consolidated the three previously disclosed shareholder derivative lawsuits: the Blackburn Shareholder action filed on February 10, 2017, the Gabilondo Shareholder action filed on May 30, 2017, and the City of Warren Police and Fire Retirement System Shareholder action filed on June 9, 2017. The complaint covers the time period from 2015 to present and alleges, generally, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, corporate waste, and misrepresentations and/or failures to disclose certain information in violation of the federal securities laws in connection with an alleged practice to direct patients with government-subsidized health insurance into private health insurance plans to maximize the Company’s profits. An amended complaint was filed in September 2017, and on December 18, 2017 the Company filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to stay proceedings in the alternative. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly. Other Proceedings In addition to the foregoing, from time to time the Company is subject to other lawsuits, demands, claims, governmental investigations and audits and legal proceedings that arise due to the nature of its business, including contractual disputes, such as with payors, suppliers and others, employee-related matters and professional and general liability claims. From time to time, the Company also initiates litigation or other legal proceedings as a plaintiff arising out of contracts or other matters. Resolved Matters Swoben Private Civil Suit: On July 13, 2009, pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the FCA and the California False Claims Act, James M. Swoben, as relator, filed his initial qui tam action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California purportedly on behalf of the United States of America and the State of California against SCAN, and certain other defendants whose identities were under seal. In April 2013, HealthCare Partners (HCP), now known as the Company’s DMG subsidiary, was one of several defendants served with a civil complaint filed by a former employee of SCAN Health Plan (SCAN), an HMO. The allegations in the complaint relate to alleged overpayments received from government healthcare programs, including allegations of violations of the federal FCA and the California False Claims Act and allegations against HCP relating to patient diagnosis coding. The complaint sought monetary damages and civil penalties as well as costs and expenses. On October 18, 2017, the relator filed a Notice of Dismissal of the action as to HCP, and the government consented to the dismissal, as a result of which the suit is now dismissed, without prejudice. Solari Post-Acquisition Matter: In 2016, HCP Nevada disclosed to the OIG for the HHS that proper procedures for clinical and eligibility determinations may not have been followed by Las Vegas Solari Hospice (Solari), which was acquired in March 2013 and sold in September 2016 by HCP Nevada. In June 2016, the Company was notified by the OIG that the disclosure submission had been accepted into the OIG’s Self Disclosure Protocol. HCP Nevada had previously made a disclosure and repayment of overpayments to National Government Services (NGS), the Medicare Administrative Contractor for HCP Nevada, for claims submitted by Solari to the federal government prior to DMG’s acquisition of Solari and claims made to the government post-acquisition for which the sellers had certain responsibilities pursuant to a management services agreement. In October 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the OIG including payment of an immaterial amount. 2011 Suit against the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: As previously disclosed, the Company had a pending lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the federal government which was originally filed in May 2011. The lawsuit related to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) underpayment of dialysis services the Company provided from 2005 through 2011 to veterans pursuant to VA regulations. In the first quarter of 2017, the Company received a payment of $538,000 related to the settlement with the VA. The Company's consolidated entities recognized a net gain of $527,000 on this settlement. The Company's nonconsolidated and managed entities recognized a gain of $9,000, of which the Company's equity investment share was $3,000. The net effect was a net increase of $530,000 to the Company's operating income. 2015 U.S. Department of Justice Vascular Access Investigation and Related Qui Tam Litigation: In November 2015, the Company announced that RMS Lifeline, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that operates under the name Lifeline Vascular Access (Lifeline), received a CID from the DOJ. The CID relates to two vascular access centers in Florida that are part of Lifeline’s vascular access business. The CID covers the period from January 1, 2008 through the present. The Company acquired these two centers in December 2012. Based on the language of the CID, the DOJ appeared to be looking at whether angiograms performed at the two centers were medically unnecessary and therefore whether related claims filed with federal healthcare programs possibly violated the FCA. Lifeline does not perform dialysis services but instead provides vascular access management services for dialysis patients. The Company cooperated with the government and produced the requested information. The DOJ investigation was initiated pursuant to a complaint brought under the qui tam provisions of the FCA (the Complaint). The Complaint was originally filed under seal in August 2014 in the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, United States ex. rel James Spafford v. DaVita HealthCare Partners, Inc., et al., Case Number 6:14-cv-1251-Orl-41DAB, naming several doctors along with the Company as defendants. In December 2015, a First Amended Complaint was filed under seal. In May 2016, the First Amended Complaint was unsealed. The First Amended Complaint alleged violations of the FCA due to the submission of claims to the government for allegedly medically unnecessary angiograms and angiography procedures at the two vascular access centers as well as employment-related claims. The Complaint covers alleged conduct dating from July 2008, prior to the Company’s acquisition of the centers, to the present. The DOJ declined to intervene. In January 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the relator and the government for an immaterial amount, and in April 2017, the court dismissed the case with prejudice. Vainer Private Civil Suit: As previously disclosed, the Company received a subpoena for documents from the OIG relating to the pharmaceutical products Zemplar, Hectorol, Venofer, Ferrlecit and erythropoietin (EPO), as well as other related matters, covering the period from January 2003 to December 2008. The Company subsequently learned that the allegations underlying this inquiry were made as part of a civil complaint filed by relators, Daniel Barbir and Dr. Alon Vainer, pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the federal FCA. The relators also alleged that the Company’s drug administration practices for the Company’s dialysis operations for Vitamin D and iron agents from 2003 through 2010 fraudulently created unnecessary waste, which was billed to and paid for by the government. In June 2015, the Company finalized the terms of the settlement with plaintiffs, including a settlement amount of $450,000 and attorney fees and other costs of $45,000 which was paid in 2015. * * * Other than as described above, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcomes of the various legal proceedings and regulatory matters to which the Company is or may be subject from time to time, including those described in this Note 16, or the timing of their resolution or the ultimate losses or impact of developments in those matters, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s revenues, earnings and cash flows. Further, any legal proceedings or regulatory matters involving the Company, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming, and often require management’s attention and result in significant legal expense, and may result in the diversion of significant operational resources, or otherwise harm the Company’s business, financial results or reputation.

Contingencies

The majority of the Company’s revenues are from government programs and may be subject to adjustment as a result of: (i) examination by government agencies or contractors, for which the resolution of any matters raised may take extended periods of time to finalize; (ii) differing interpretations of government regulations by different Medicare contractors or regulatory authorities; (iii) differing opinions regarding a patient’s medical diagnosis or the medical necessity of services provided; and (iv) retroactive applications or interpretations of governmental requirements. In addition, the Company’s revenues from commercial payors may be subject to adjustment as a result of potential claims for refunds, as a result of government actions or as a result of other claims by commercial payors.

The Company operates in a highly regulated industry and is a party to various lawsuits, claims, qui tam suits, governmental investigations and audits (including investigations resulting from its obligation to self-report suspected violations of law) and other legal proceedings. The Company records accruals for certain legal proceedings and regulatory matters to the extent that the Company determines an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company’s total recorded accruals, including DMG, with respect to legal proceedings and regulatory matters, net of anticipated third party recoveries, were approximately $6,000 and $69,000, respectively. While these accruals reflect the Company’s best estimate of the probable loss for those matters as of the dates of those accruals, the recorded amounts may differ materially from the actual amount of the losses for those matters, and any anticipated third party recoveries for any such losses may not ultimately be recoverable. Additionally, in some cases, no estimate of the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, if any, can be made because of the inherently unpredictable nature of legal proceedings and regulatory matters, which also may be impacted by various factors, including that they may involve indeterminate claims for monetary damages or may involve fines, penalties or non-monetary remedies; present novel legal theories or legal uncertainties; involve disputed facts; represent a shift in regulatory policy; are in the early stages of the proceedings; or result in a change of business practices. Further, there may be various levels of judicial review available to the Company in connection with any such proceeding.

The following is a description of certain lawsuits, claims, governmental investigations and audits and other legal proceedings to which the Company is subject.

Inquiries by the Federal Government and Certain Related Civil Proceedings

2015 U.S. Office of Inspector General (OIG) Medicare Advantage Civil Investigation: In March 2015, JSA HealthCare Corporation (JSA), a subsidiary of DMG, received a subpoena from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requesting documents and information for the period from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2013, for certain MA plans for which JSA provided services. It also requests information regarding JSA’s communications about patient diagnoses as they relate to certain MA plans generally, and more specifically as related to two Florida physicians with whom JSA previously contracted. The Company is producing the requested information and is cooperating with the government’s investigation.

In addition to the subpoena described above, in June 2015, the Company received a civil subpoena from the OIG covering the period from January 1, 2008 through the present and seeking production of a wide range of documents relating to the Company’s and its subsidiaries’ (including DMG’s and its subsidiary JSA’s) provision of services to MA plans and related patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment submissions and payments. The Company believes that the request is part of a broader industry investigation into MA patient diagnosis coding and risk adjustment practices and potential overpayments by the government. The information requested includes information relating to patient diagnosis coding practices for a number of conditions, including potentially improper historical DMG coding for a particular condition. With respect to that condition, the guidance related to that coding issue was discontinued following the Company’s November 1, 2012 acquisition of HealthCare Partners (now known as the Company's DMG business), and the Company notified CMS in April 2015 of the coding practice and potential overpayments. In that regard, the Company has identified certain additional coding practices which may have been problematic, some of which were the subject of the Swoben Private Civil Suit, and is in discussions with the DOJ relating to those practices. The Company is cooperating with the government. In addition, the Company is continuing to review other DMG coding practices to determine whether there were any improper coding issues. In connection with the Company's acquisition of DMG in 2012, the Company has certain indemnification rights against the sellers and an escrow was established as security for the indemnification. The Company has submitted an indemnification claim against the sellers secured by the escrow for any and all liabilities incurred relating to these matters and intends to pursue recovery from the escrow. However, the Company can make no assurances that the indemnification and escrow will cover the full amount of the Company’s potential losses related to these matters.

2016 U.S. Attorney Prescription Drug Investigation: In early February 2016, the Company announced that its pharmacy services’ wholly-owned subsidiary, DaVita Rx, received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas. The government is conducting a federal False Claims Act (FCA) investigation concerning allegations that DaVita Rx presented or caused to be presented false claims for payment to the government for prescription medications, as well as into the Company’s relationship with pharmaceutical manufacturers. The CID covers the period from January 1, 2006 through the present. In the spring of 2015, the Company initiated an internal compliance review of DaVita Rx during which it identified potential billing and operational issues, including potential write-offs and discounts of patient co-payment obligations, and credits to payors for returns of prescription drugs related to DaVita Rx. The Company notified the government in September 2015 that it was conducting this review of DaVita Rx and began providing regular updates of its review. Upon completion of its review, the Company filed a self-disclosure with the OIG in February 2016 and has been working to address and update the practices it identified in the self-disclosure, some of which overlap with information requested by the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The OIG informed the Company in February 2016 that its submission was not accepted. They indicated that the OIG is not expressing an opinion regarding the conduct disclosed or the Company’s legal positions. In connection with the Company’s ongoing efforts working with the government the Company learned that a qui tam complaint had been filed covering some of the issues in the CID and the Company’s self-disclosure. In December 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the government and relators in the qui tam matter and that included total monetary consideration of $63,700, as previously announced, of which $41,500 was an incremental cash payment and $22,200 was for amounts previously refunded, and all of which was previously accrued. The government’s investigation into the Company's relationship with pharmaceutical manufacturers is ongoing and the Company is continuing to cooperate with the government in this investigation.

2017 U.S. Attorney American Kidney Fund Investigation: On January 4, 2017, the Company was served with an administrative subpoena for records by the United States Attorney’s Office, District of Massachusetts, relating to an investigation into possible federal health care offenses. The subpoena covers the period from January 1, 2007 through the present, and seeks documents relevant to charitable patient assistance organizations, particularly the American Kidney Fund, including documents related to efforts to provide patients with information concerning the availability of charitable assistance. The Company is cooperating with the government and is producing the requested information.

* * *

Although the Company cannot predict whether or when proceedings might be initiated or when these matters may be resolved (other than as described above), it is not unusual for inquiries such as these to continue for a considerable period of time through the various phases of document and witness requests and on-going discussions with regulators. In addition to the inquiries and proceedings specifically identified above, the Company is frequently subject to other inquiries by state or federal government agencies and/or private civil qui tam complaints filed by relators. Negative findings or terms and conditions that the Company might agree to accept as part of a negotiated resolution of pending or future government inquiries or relator proceedings could result in, among other things, substantial financial penalties or awards against the Company, substantial payments made by the Company, harm to the Company’s reputation, required changes to the Company’s business practices, exclusion from future participation in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health care programs and, if criminal proceedings were initiated against the Company, possible criminal penalties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Shareholder Claims

Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia Securities Class Action Civil Suit: On February 1, 2017, the Peace Officers’ Annuity and Benefit Fund of Georgia filed a putative federal securities class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and certain executives. The complaint covers the time period of August 2015 to October 2016 and alleges, generally, that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws concerning the Company’s financial results and revenue derived from patients who received charitable premium assistance from an industry-funded non-profit organization. The complaint further alleges that the process by which patients obtained commercial insurance and received charitable premium assistance was improper and "created a false impression of DaVita’s business and operational status and future growth prospects." In November 2017, the court appointed the lead plaintiff and an amended complaint was filed on January 12, 2018. The Company's response is due March 13, 2018. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly.

In re DaVita Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation: On August 15, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware consolidated the three previously disclosed shareholder derivative lawsuits: the Blackburn Shareholder action filed on February 10, 2017, the Gabilondo Shareholder action filed on May 30, 2017, and the City of Warren Police and Fire Retirement System Shareholder action filed on June 9, 2017. The complaint covers the time period from 2015 to present and alleges, generally, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, corporate waste, and misrepresentations and/or failures to disclose certain information in violation of the federal securities laws in connection with an alleged practice to direct patients with government-subsidized health insurance into private health insurance plans to maximize the Company’s profits. An amended complaint was filed in September 2017, and on December 18, 2017 the Company filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to stay proceedings in the alternative. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to defend this action accordingly.

Other Proceedings

In addition to the foregoing, from time to time the Company is subject to other lawsuits, demands, claims, governmental investigations and audits and legal proceedings that arise due to the nature of its business, including contractual disputes, such as with payors, suppliers and others, employee-related matters and professional and general liability claims. From time to time, the Company also initiates litigation or other legal proceedings as a plaintiff arising out of contracts or other matters.

Resolved Matters

Swoben Private Civil Suit: On July 13, 2009, pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the FCA and the California False Claims Act, James M. Swoben, as relator, filed his initial qui tam action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California purportedly on behalf of the United States of America and the State of California against SCAN, and certain other defendants whose identities were under seal. In April 2013, HealthCare Partners (HCP), now known as the Company’s DMG subsidiary, was one of several defendants served with a civil complaint filed by a former employee of SCAN Health Plan (SCAN), an HMO. The allegations in the complaint relate to alleged overpayments received from government healthcare programs, including allegations of violations of the federal FCA and the California False Claims Act and allegations against HCP relating to patient diagnosis coding. The complaint sought monetary damages and civil penalties as well as costs and expenses. On October 18, 2017, the relator filed a Notice of Dismissal of the action as to HCP, and the government consented to the dismissal, as a result of which the suit is now dismissed, without prejudice.

Solari Post-Acquisition Matter: In 2016, HCP Nevada disclosed to the OIG for the HHS that proper procedures for clinical and eligibility determinations may not have been followed by Las Vegas Solari Hospice (Solari), which was acquired in March 2013 and sold in September 2016 by HCP Nevada. In June 2016, the Company was notified by the OIG that the disclosure submission had been accepted into the OIG’s Self Disclosure Protocol. HCP Nevada had previously made a disclosure and repayment of overpayments to National Government Services (NGS), the Medicare Administrative Contractor for HCP Nevada, for claims submitted by Solari to the federal government prior to DMG’s acquisition of Solari and claims made to the government post-acquisition for which the sellers had certain responsibilities pursuant to a management services agreement. In October 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the OIG including payment of an immaterial amount.

2011 Suit against the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: As previously disclosed, the Company had a pending lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the federal government which was originally filed in May 2011. The lawsuit related to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) underpayment of dialysis services the Company provided from 2005 through 2011 to veterans pursuant to VA regulations. In the first quarter of 2017, the Company received a payment of $538,000 related to the settlement with the VA. The Company's consolidated entities recognized a net gain of $527,000 on this settlement. The Company's nonconsolidated and managed entities recognized a gain of $9,000, of which the Company's equity investment share was $3,000. The net effect was a net increase of $530,000 to the Company's operating income.

2015 U.S. Department of Justice Vascular Access Investigation and Related Qui Tam Litigation: In November 2015, the Company announced that RMS Lifeline, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that operates under the name Lifeline Vascular Access (Lifeline), received a CID from the DOJ. The CID relates to two vascular access centers in Florida that are part of Lifeline’s vascular access business. The CID covers the period from January 1, 2008 through the present. The Company acquired these two centers in December 2012. Based on the language of the CID, the DOJ appeared to be looking at whether angiograms performed at the two centers were medically unnecessary and therefore whether related claims filed with federal healthcare programs possibly violated the FCA. Lifeline does not perform dialysis services but instead provides vascular access management services for dialysis patients. The Company cooperated with the government and produced the requested information. The DOJ investigation was initiated pursuant to a complaint brought under the qui tam provisions of the FCA (the Complaint). The Complaint was originally filed under seal in August 2014 in the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, United States ex. rel James Spafford v. DaVita HealthCare Partners, Inc., et al., Case Number 6:14-cv-1251-Orl-41DAB, naming several doctors along with the Company as defendants. In December 2015, a First Amended Complaint was filed under seal. In May 2016, the First Amended Complaint was unsealed. The First Amended Complaint alleged violations of the FCA due to the submission of claims to the government for allegedly medically unnecessary angiograms and angiography procedures at the two vascular access centers as well as employment-related claims. The Complaint covers alleged conduct dating from July 2008, prior to the Company’s acquisition of the centers, to the present. The DOJ declined to intervene. In January 2017, the Company finalized and executed a settlement agreement with the relator and the government for an immaterial amount, and in April 2017, the court dismissed the case with prejudice.

Vainer Private Civil Suit: As previously disclosed, the Company received a subpoena for documents from the OIG relating to the pharmaceutical products Zemplar, Hectorol, Venofer, Ferrlecit and erythropoietin (EPO), as well as other related matters, covering the period from January 2003 to December 2008. The Company subsequently learned that the allegations underlying this inquiry were made as part of a civil complaint filed by relators, Daniel Barbir and Dr. Alon Vainer, pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the federal FCA. The relators also alleged that the Company’s drug administration practices for the Company’s dialysis operations for Vitamin D and iron agents from 2003 through 2010 fraudulently created unnecessary waste, which was billed to and paid for by the government. In June 2015, the Company finalized the terms of the settlement with plaintiffs, including a settlement amount of $450,000 and attorney fees and other costs of $45,000 which was paid in 2015.

* * *

Other than as described above, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcomes of the various legal proceedings and regulatory matters to which the Company is or may be subject from time to time, including those described in this Note 16, or the timing of their resolution or the ultimate losses or impact of developments in those matters, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s revenues, earnings and cash flows. Further, any legal proceedings or regulatory matters involving the Company, whether meritorious or not, are time consuming, and often require management’s attention and result in significant legal expense, and may result in the diversion of significant operational resources, or otherwise harm the Company’s business, financial results or reputation.