UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant  ☒                             Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ☐

Check the appropriate box:

KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

PRELIMINARY PROXY STATEMENT, SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED FEBRUARY 5, 2018

KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC.

[●], 2018

Dear Stockholder:

You are cordially invited to attend a special meeting of the stockholders of Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (“Kindred”) to be held at [●] on [●], 2018 at [●], Eastern Time (the “special meeting”).

At the special meeting, stockholders will be asked to consider and vote on a proposal to adopt the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of December 19, 2017 (as amended or modified from time to time, the “merger agreement”), among Kindred, Kentucky Hospital Holdings, LLC (“HospitalCo Parent”), Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc. (“Parent”) and Kentucky Homecare Merger Sub, Inc. (“Merger Sub”). Subject to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement, Merger Sub will be merged with and into Kindred and Kindred will survive the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent (the “merger”). Parent and Merger Sub were formed by affiliates of TPG Global, LLC (“TPG”) and, as of immediately following the transactions contemplated in the separation agreement (as defined below), will be owned by affiliates of each of TPG and Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe and Humana Inc. (collectively, the “Consortium”).

If the merger is completed, our stockholders will have the right to receive $9.00 in cash, without interest and subject to any applicable withholding taxes, for each share of common stock, par value $0.25 per share, of Kindred (“Kindred common stock”), other than excluded shares (as defined in the accompanying proxy statement), that they own immediately prior to the effective time of the merger, which represents a premium of approximately 27% to Kindred’s 90-day volume weighted average price for the period ended December 15, 2017, the last trading day before The Wall Street Journal published an article stating that Kindred was in advanced negotiations with the Consortium regarding a potential sale transaction. Approval of the proposal to adopt the merger agreement requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Kindred common stock entitled to vote thereon.

Kindred common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) under the symbol “KND”. The closing price of Kindred common stock on the NYSE on [●], 2018, the most recent practicable date prior to the date of the accompanying proxy statement, was $[●] per share.

The Kindred board of directors (the “Board”) has reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the merger agreement and the merger and has determined that the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, are fair to, and in the best interests of, Kindred and its stockholders and has approved and declared advisable the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the merger. The Board made its determination after consultation with its outside legal counsel and financial advisors and consideration of a number of factors more fully described in the accompanying proxy statement. The Board recommends that you vote “FOR” the proposal to adopt the merger agreement.

At the special meeting, stockholders will also be asked to vote on (i) a proposal to approve, on a non-binding, advisory basis, certain compensation that will or may be paid to Kindred’s named executive officers by Kindred based on or otherwise relating to the merger, as required by the rules adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and (ii) a proposal to approve an adjournment of the special meeting, from time to time, if necessary or appropriate, to solicit additional votes for the approval of the proposal to adopt the merger agreement. The Board recommends that you vote “FOR” each of these proposals.

The Board is soliciting your proxy to assure that a quorum is present and that your shares are represented and voted at the special meeting and any postponement or adjournment thereof.

If your shares are held in “street name,” you should instruct your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee how to vote your shares on each proposal in accordance with your voting instruction form.

The merger cannot be completed unless Kindred stockholders adopt the merger agreement. Your vote is very important, regardless of the number of shares you own. Whether or not you expect to attend the special meeting in person, please submit a proxy to vote your shares as promptly as possible so that your shares may be represented and voted at the special meeting. If you attend the special meeting and vote in person, your vote by ballot will revoke any proxy previously submitted. If you fail to return your proxy or to attend the special meeting in person, your shares will not be counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present at the special meeting and will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the adoption of the merger agreement. Similarly, if you hold your shares in “street name” and fail to instruct your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee how to vote your shares, your shares will not be counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present and will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the adoption of the merger agreement.

The closing of the merger is conditioned on, among other things, the satisfaction of the conditions to consummation of the separation of Kindred from its home health, hospice and community care business pursuant to the Separation Agreement, dated as of December 19, 2017 (as amended or modified from time to time, the “separation agreement”), among Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent and Kentucky Hospital Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation wholly owned by HospitalCo Parent. Kindred stockholders are not required to adopt or approve the separation agreement or the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement prior to the merger, and Kindred is not seeking a vote of its stockholders at the special meeting to approve the separation agreement or the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement. We have included information regarding the separation agreement and the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement in the accompanying proxy statement solely because the satisfaction of the conditions to the consummation of such transactions is a condition to the completion of the merger.

The accompanying proxy statement contains detailed information about Kindred, the special meeting, the merger agreement, the merger and the merger-related named executive officer compensation proposal. A copy of the merger agreement is attached as Annex A to the accompanying proxy statement and incorporated therein by reference. We urge you to, and you should, read the entire proxy statement carefully, including the merger agreement and the other annexes and the documents referred to or incorporated by reference in the accompanying proxy statement. You may obtain additional information about Kindred from documents we have filed with the SEC.

If you have any questions or need assistance voting your shares of our common stock, please contact MacKenzie Partners, Inc. (“MacKenzie”), our proxy solicitor, by calling toll-free at (800) 322-2885 or collect at (212) 929-5500. MacKenzie also may be contacted via email at proxy@mackenziepartners.com.

Thank you for your confidence in Kindred.

Sincerely,

Phyllis R. Yale

Chair of the Board of Directors

Kindred Healthcare, Inc.

Neither the SEC nor any state securities regulatory agency has approved or disapproved of the merger, passed upon the merits of the merger agreement or the merger or determined if the accompanying proxy statement is accurate or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The accompanying proxy statement is dated [●], 2018 and, together with the enclosed form of proxy card, is first being mailed to Kindred stockholders on or about [●], 2018.

KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC.

680 SOUTH FOURTH STREET

LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY 40202

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT. WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE SPECIAL MEETING IN PERSON, PLEASE SUBMIT A PROXY TO VOTE YOUR SHARES OVER THE INTERNET OR BY TELEPHONE PURSUANT TO THE INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN THESE MATERIALS OR COMPLETE, DATE, SIGN AND RETURN A PROXY CARD AS PROMPTLY AS POSSIBLE. IF YOU RECEIVE MORE THAN ONE PROXY BECAUSE YOU OWN SHARES REGISTERED IN DIFFERENT NAMES OR ADDRESSES, EACH PROXY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED. IF YOU DO NOT SUBMIT YOUR PROXY OR VOTE IN PERSON AT THE SPECIAL MEETING ON THE MERGER PROPOSAL, IT WILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS A VOTE “AGAINST” THE MERGER PROPOSAL. IF YOU HOLD YOUR SHARES IN “STREET NAME” AND DO NOT INSTRUCT YOUR BANK, BROKERAGE FIRM OR OTHER NOMINEE HOW TO VOTE YOUR SHARES, IT WILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS A VOTE “AGAINST” THE MERGER PROPOSAL.

Your proxy may be revoked at any time before the vote at the special meeting by following the procedures outlined in the accompanying proxy statement.

If your shares are held by a bank, brokerage firm or other nominee and you wish to vote in person at the special meeting, you must bring to the special meeting a proxy from the bank, brokerage firm or other nominee that holds your shares authorizing you to vote in person at the special meeting. Please also bring to the special meeting your account statement evidencing your beneficial ownership of Kindred common stock as of the record date. All stockholders should also bring photo identification.

The proxy statement of which this notice forms a part provides a detailed description of the merger, the merger agreement, the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and provides specific information concerning the special meeting. We urge you to read the proxy statement, including any documents incorporated therein by reference, and its annexes carefully and in their entirety. If you have any questions concerning the merger or the proxy statement, would like additional copies of the proxy statement or need help voting your shares of Kindred common stock, please contact Kindred’s proxy solicitor, MacKenzie Partners, Inc.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

Joseph L. Landenwich

General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

Louisville, Kentucky

[●], 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY TERM SHEET

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement and may not contain all the information that is important to you with respect to the merger and the other matters being considered at the special meeting of Kindred stockholders. We urge you to read carefully the remainder of this proxy statement, including the attached annexes, and the other documents to which we have referred you. For additional information on Kindred, see the section entitled “Where You Can Find More Information” beginning on page [●]. We have included page references in this summary to direct you to a more complete description of the topics presented below.

All references to “Kindred,” “the Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our” in this proxy statement refer to Kindred Healthcare, Inc., a Delaware corporation. Kindred, following the completion of the merger, is sometimes referred to in this proxy statement as the “surviving entity,” and, following completion of the hospital merger, is sometimes referred to in this proxy statement as the “surviving entity in the hospital merger.” In addition, unless otherwise indicated, or unless the context otherwise requires, a reference in this proxy statement to:

1

The Parties

Kindred Healthcare, Inc. (see page [●])

Kindred is a healthcare services company that through its subsidiaries operates a home health, hospice and community care business, transitional care (“TC”) hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation hospitals (“IRFs”), and a contract rehabilitation services business across the United States. As of September 30, 2017, our Kindred at Home division primarily provided home health, hospice, and community care services from 609 sites of service in 40 states. Our hospital division operated 77 TC hospitals (certified as long-term acute care (“LTAC”) hospitals under the Medicare program) in 18 states. Our Kindred Rehabilitation Services division operated 19 IRFs and 101 hospital-based acute rehabilitation units (certified as IRFs), and provided rehabilitation services primarily in hospitals and long-term care settings in 45 states.

Kindred is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware in 1998 and headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. Kindred’s principal offices are located at 680 South Fourth Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202 and our telephone number is (502) 596-7300. Kindred common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the ticker symbol “KND”. Our corporate web address is www.kindredhealthcare.com. The information provided on the Kindred website is not part of this proxy statement and is not incorporated in this proxy statement by reference hereby or by any other reference to Kindred’s website provided in this proxy statement.

Additional information about Kindred is contained in our public filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). See the section entitled “Where You Can Find Additional Information” beginning on page [●].

Kentucky Hospital Holdings, LLC (see page [●])

HospitalCo Parent is a Delaware limited liability company that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement, separation agreement and related agreements and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. HospitalCo Parent has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements. Upon completion of the transactions contemplated thereby, Kindred will be an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of HospitalCo Parent. HospitalCo Parent’s principal executive office is located at 301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 and its telephone number is (817) 871-4000.

As of immediately following the transactions contemplated in the separation agreement, HospitalCo Parent will be controlled by affiliates of each of TPG and WCAS. As of the date hereof, HospitalCo Parent is controlled by affiliates of TPG.

TPG is a leading global alternative asset firm founded in 1992 with more than $79 billion of assets under management and offices in Austin, Beijing, Boston, Dallas, Fort Worth, Hong Kong, Houston, London, Luxembourg, Melbourne, Moscow, Mumbai, New York, San Francisco, Seoul and Singapore. TPG’s investment platforms are across a wide range of asset classes, including private equity, growth venture, real estate, credit and public equity. TPG aims to build dynamic products and options for its investors while also instituting discipline and operational excellence across the investment strategy and performance of its portfolio.

Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe is a private equity firm that focuses its investment activity in two target industries: technology and healthcare. Since its founding in 1979, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe has organized 16 limited partnerships with total capital of over $22 billion. It is currently investing via an equity fund, Welsh, Carson, Anderson and Stowe XII, L.P., which (together with its affiliated co-investment funds) closed on over $3.3 billion in commitments. Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe has a current portfolio of approximately 20 companies with 2017 annual revenues totaling over $16 billion. Its strategy is to partner with outstanding management teams and build value for its investors through a combination of operational improvements, internal growth initiatives and strategic acquisitions.

2

Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc. (see page [●])

Parent is a Delaware corporation that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement, separation agreement and related agreements and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. Parent has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements. Parent’s principal executive office is located at 301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 and its telephone number is (817) 871-4000.

As of immediately following the transactions contemplated in the separation agreement, Parent will be controlled by affiliates of each of TPG and WCAS and Humana. As of the date hereof, Parent is controlled by affiliates of TPG.

Humana is a leading health and well-being company focused on making it easy for people to achieve their best health with clinical excellence through coordinated care. Its strategy integrates care delivery, the member experience and clinical and consumer insights to encourage engagement, behavior change, proactive clinical outreach and wellness for the millions of people it serves across the country. As of September 30, 2017, it had approximately 13.8 million members in its medical benefit plans, as well as approximately 6.9 million members in its specialty products.

Kentucky Homecare Merger Sub, Inc. (see page [●])

Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation and an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Parent that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. Merger Sub has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements. Merger Sub’s principal executive office is located at 301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 and its telephone number is (817) 871-4000.

The Special Meeting

Date, Time and Place (see page [●])

The special meeting of Kindred stockholders (the “special meeting”) is scheduled to be held at [●] on [●], 2018 at [●], Eastern Time.

Purpose of the Meeting (see page [●])

The special meeting is being held in order to consider and vote on the following proposals:

Stockholders may also be asked to transact such other business as may properly be brought before the special meeting, or any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting, by or at the direction of the Board.

3

The Board has reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the proposed merger. After consulting with its outside legal counsel and financial advisors and after consideration of various factors more fully described in this proxy statement, the Board determined that the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the merger, are fair to and in the best interests of Kindred and our stockholders and declared advisable and approved the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the merger. The Board recommends that Kindred stockholders vote “FOR” the merger proposal, “FOR” the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and “FOR” the adjournment proposal.

Kindred stockholders must vote to approve the merger proposal as a condition for the merger to occur. If Kindred stockholders fail to approve the merger proposal by the requisite vote, the merger will not occur.

Record Date; Stockholders Entitled to Vote (see page [●])

Only holders of record of Kindred common stock at the close of business on [●], 2018, the record date for the special meeting (the “record date”), will be entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the special meeting or any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting. On the record date, [●] shares of Kindred common stock were issued and outstanding, held by approximately [●] holders of record.

Holders of record of Kindred common stock are entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote at the special meeting for each share of Kindred common stock they own of record on the record date. A complete list of stockholders entitled to vote at the special meeting will be available for inspection at Kindred’s principal place of business during regular business hours for a period of no less than 10 days before the special meeting and at the special meeting.

Quorum (see page [●])

Under our bylaws, the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Kindred common stock entitled to vote on a matter at the special meeting on the record date, whether in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum. There must be a quorum for business to be conducted at the special meeting. Failure of a quorum to be represented at the special meeting will necessitate an adjournment or postponement of the special meeting and may subject Kindred to additional expense.

If you submit (and do not thereafter revoke) a properly executed proxy card, even if you abstain from voting, your shares of Kindred common stock will be counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present at the special meeting. In the event that a quorum is not present at the special meeting or additional votes must be solicited to adopt the merger agreement, the meeting may be adjourned or postponed to solicit additional proxies.

Required Vote (see page [●])

The approval of the merger proposal requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock outstanding on the record date and entitled to vote thereon.

The approval of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal (on a non-binding basis) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereon.

The approval of the adjournment proposal requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereon.

As of the record date, there were [●] shares of Kindred common stock outstanding.

4

Voting at the Special Meeting (see page [●])

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, you are considered a “stockholder of record.” Stockholders of record can vote their shares of Kindred common stock in the following four ways: (i) by indicating your vote by completing, signing and dating the proxy card where indicated and by mailing or otherwise returning the card in the envelope that will be provided to you, (ii) by submitting your proxy by telephone by dialing the toll-free number [●], (iii) by submitting your proxy over the Internet by going to [●] or (iv) by attending the special meeting and voting your shares in person. Even if you plan to attend the special meeting, Kindred encourages you to submit a proxy in advance by Internet, telephone or mail so that your vote will be counted even if you later decide not to attend the special meeting. Votes cast in person or by proxy at the special meeting will be tabulated by the inspectors of election appointed for the special meeting, who also will determine whether a quorum is present.

Kindred can provide reasonable assistance to help you participate in the special meeting if you inform the Company about your disability and how you plan to attend. Please write to the Company at 680 South Fourth Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202, Attention: Corporate Secretary, or call at (502) 596-7300.

If your shares are held by your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name” and you will receive a form from your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee seeking instruction from you as to how your shares should be voted. You should instruct your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee how to vote your shares of Kindred common stock on each proposal in accordance with your voting instruction form. If you beneficially own your shares and receive a voting instruction form, you can vote by following the instructions on your voting instruction form. Please refer to information from your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee on how to submit voting instructions. Stockholders who own their shares in “street name” are not able to vote at the special meeting unless they have a proxy, executed in their favor, from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving them the right to vote the shares at the special meeting.

You may revoke your proxy at any time prior to the vote at the special meeting by (i) sending a written statement to that effect to the Company, at 680 South Fourth Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202, Attention: Corporate Secretary, bearing a date later than the date of the proxy, that is received prior to the special meeting, (ii) voting again by Internet or telephone, so long as you do so before the deadline of [●] on [●], 2018, (iii) submitting a properly signed proxy card with a later date and mailing it to the address set forth therein so that it is received prior to the special meeting, or (iv) attending the special meeting and voting in person. Attendance at the special meeting will not, in and of itself, result in the revocation of a proxy or cause your shares of Kindred common stock to be voted. If you hold shares in street name, you may submit new voting instructions by contacting your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee. You may also change your vote or revoke your proxy in person at the special meeting if you obtain a signed proxy from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving you the right to vote the shares.

Kindred recommends that you submit a proxy to vote your shares as soon as possible, even if you are planning to attend the special meeting to ensure that your shares are represented and voted at the meeting and so that the vote count will not be delayed.

Abstentions and Broker Non-Votes (see page [●])

At the special meeting, abstentions will be counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists. Abstaining from voting will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal, the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and the adjournment proposal. If no instruction as to how to vote is given (including no instruction to abstain from voting) in an executed, duly returned and not revoked proxy, the proxy will be voted “FOR” (i) approval of the merger proposal, (ii) approval of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and (iii) approval of the adjournment proposal. Broker

5

non-votes are shares held in “street name” by banks, brokerage firms or other nominees that are present or represented by proxy at the special meeting, but with respect to which the bank, brokerage firm or other nominee is not instructed by the beneficial owner of such shares how to vote on a particular proposal and such bank, brokerage firm or other nominee does not have discretionary voting power on such proposal. Because, under NYSE rules, banks, brokerage firms or other nominees holding shares in “street name” do not have discretionary voting authority with respect to any of the three proposals described in this proxy statement, if a beneficial owner of shares of Kindred common stock held in “street name” does not give voting instructions to the bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, then those shares will not be counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting. As the vote to approve the merger proposal is based on the total number of shares of Kindred common stock outstanding on the record date, not just the shares that are counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting, if you fail to issue voting instructions to your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, it will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal.

Solicitation of Proxies (see page [●])

The Board is soliciting your proxy, and Kindred will bear the cost of soliciting proxies. MacKenzie Partners, Inc. (“MacKenzie”) has been retained to assist with the solicitation of proxies and provide related proxy advisory services. MacKenzie will be paid an initial fee of $50,000 and $15,000 quarterly thereafter and will be reimbursed for its reasonable fees and expenses for these services in connection with the special meeting. Kindred will also indemnify MacKenzie for certain losses arising out of these services. Solicitation initially will be made by mail. Kindred and MacKenzie also will request that banks, brokerage firms, and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries send proxy materials to the beneficial owners of shares of Kindred common stock and will, if requested, reimburse them for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses in doing so.

Adjournment (see page [●])

In addition to the merger proposal and the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal, Kindred stockholders are also being asked to approve the adjournment proposal, which will enable the adjournment of the special meeting for the purpose of soliciting additional votes in favor of the merger proposal if there are not sufficient votes at the time of the special meeting to approve the merger proposal. If a quorum is not present, the person presiding at the special meeting or the stockholders holding a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereat may adjourn the special meeting from time to time until a quorum shall be present. If the adjournment is for more than 30 days, or if a new record date is set for the adjourned meeting, a notice of the adjourned meeting shall be given to each stockholder of record entitled to vote at the meeting. In addition, the special meeting could be postponed before it commences, subject to the terms of the merger agreement. If the special meeting is adjourned or postponed, stockholders who have already submitted their proxies will be able to revoke them at any time prior to the final vote on the proposals. If you return a proxy and do not indicate how you wish to vote on the adjournment proposal, your shares will be voted in favor of the adjournment proposal.

The Merger

The rights and obligations of the parties to the merger agreement are governed by the specific terms and conditions of the merger agreement and not by any summary or other information in this proxy statement. Therefore, the information in this proxy statement regarding the merger agreement and the merger is qualified in its entirety by reference to the merger agreement, a copy of which is attached as Annex A to this proxy statement and is incorporated herein by reference. We encourage you to read the merger agreement carefully and in its entirety because it is the principal legal agreement that governs the merger.

6

Structure of the Merger (see page [●])

If the merger is completed, then at the effective time of the merger (the “effective time”), Merger Sub will merge with and into Kindred, the separate corporate existence of Merger Sub will cease and Kindred will survive the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent.

Merger Consideration (see page [●])

Upon the terms and subject to the conditions of the merger agreement, at the effective time, each share of Kindred common stock (other than shares held by Parent, HospitalCo Parent, Merger Sub or Kindred (as treasury stock or otherwise) and their respective direct or indirect wholly owned subsidiaries (which will be cancelled) and shares owned by stockholders who have not voted in favor of adoption of the merger agreement and have properly exercised and perfected a demand for appraisal rights under Delaware law (collectively, the “excluded shares”)) will have the right to receive $9.00 in cash, without interest and subject to any applicable withholding taxes (the “merger consideration”).

Treatment of Kindred Equity Awards (see page [●])

The merger agreement provides that outstanding equity-based awards under Kindred’s equity plans will be treated as set forth below.

Stock Options. Each option to purchase Kindred common stock (a “Kindred option”) that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time, whether or not then vested or exercisable, will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive an amount in cash equal to the excess, if any, of the merger consideration over the exercise price of such option, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Any Kindred option that has an exercise price that is equal to or greater than the merger consideration will be cancelled without consideration.

Stock Awards. Each other stock award on Kindred common stock (“Kindred stock award”) that is outstanding and vested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time, other than those unvested awards held by Kindred executive officers and other certain agreed-upon members of management (“listed persons”), will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such Kindred stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. For purposes of this cancellation and conversion of unvested Kindred stock awards, each such Kindred stock award subject to performance-based vesting conditions shall be deemed earned at the target performance level.

Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time and held by listed persons will be converted into a replacement cash award for an amount equal to the product of (x) the merger consideration and (y) the number of shares of Kindred common stock to which such Kindred stock award relates (as determined in accordance herewith) (“replacement cash award”). Each replacement cash award will be subject to the same terms and conditions applicable to the Kindred stock award immediately prior to the effective time (including service-based vesting on the original vesting schedule and payment on the originally scheduled vesting date of such award), except that (i) any performance-based conditions to which such Kindred stock award was subject shall be deemed earned at the target performance level so that the replacement cash award shall be subject to service-based vesting only and (ii) if such listed person’s employment is terminated by the Company, HospitalCo Parent, Parent or their respective affiliates, as applicable, without “cause” or by such listed person for “good reason” during the service-based vesting period applicable to such listed person’s replacement cash award, such replacement cash award shall vest and become payable in full as of the date of such termination.

7

Recommendation of the Board (see page [●])

The Board has reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the proposed merger. After consulting with its outside legal counsel and financial advisors and after consideration of various factors, the Board (i) determined that the merger agreement and the separation agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby are fair to, and in the best interests of, Kindred stockholders, (ii) approved and declared advisable the execution, delivery and performance of the merger agreement and the separation agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated thereby and (iii) resolved that the merger agreement be submitted to Kindred stockholders for adoption thereby in accordance with applicable law, the merger agreement and the bylaws of Kindred at a special meeting of stockholders and recommended that our stockholders vote to adopt the merger agreement. The approval and recommendation set forth above were unanimously approved by the Board, other than Dr. Sharad Mansukani, who recused himself from Board deliberation over and approval of these matters because Dr. Mansukani serves as a Senior Advisor to TPG. Certain factors considered by the Board in reaching its decision to adopt the merger agreement can be found in “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) —Recommendation of the Board and Reasons for the Merger” beginning on page [●].

The Board recommends that Kindred stockholders vote:

Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors (see page [●])

Opinion of Barclays. Kindred engaged Barclays Capital Inc. (“Barclays”) to act as its financial advisor in connection with Kindred’s consideration of strategic alternatives, including the merger. On December 18, 2017, Barclays rendered its oral opinion (which was subsequently confirmed in writing) to the Board that, as of December 18, 2017 and based upon and subject to the qualifications, limitations, factors and assumptions stated in its opinion, from a financial point of view, the consideration to be received by the stockholders of Kindred (other than holders of excluded shares) was fair to such stockholders.

The full text of Barclays’ written opinion, dated as of December 18, 2017, is attached as Annex C. Barclays’ written opinion sets forth, among other things, the assumptions made, procedures followed, factors considered and limitations upon the review undertaken by Barclays in rendering its opinion. Barclays provided advisory services and its opinion for the information and assistance of the Board in connection with its consideration of the merger. Kindred encourages you to read the opinion carefully in its entirety. The Barclays opinion is not a recommendation as to how any holder of Kindred common stock should vote with respect to the merger or any other matter. Barclays’ opinion addresses only the fairness, from a financial point of view and as of the date of such opinion, of the merger consideration to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares) to the extent expressly specified in such opinion and does not address any other term, aspect or implication of (i) the merger or the separation (including, without limitation, the form or structure of the merger or the separation), (ii) the merger agreement and the separation agreement or (iii) any other agreement, transaction document or instrument contemplated by the merger agreement or the separation agreement or to be entered into or amended in connection with the merger or the separation. Pursuant to an engagement letter between Kindred and Barclays, Kindred has agreed to pay Barclays a transaction fee of $17.5 million, $2.5 million of which was paid following the delivery of the Barclays opinion, and the remainder of which is contingent upon consummation of the merger.

For a description of the opinion that the Board received from Barclays, see “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors” beginning on page [●].

8

Opinion of Guggenheim Securities. Kindred engaged Guggenheim Securities, LLC (“Guggenheim Securities”) to act as its financial advisor in connection with Kindred’s consideration of strategic alternatives, including the merger. At the December 18, 2017 meeting of the Board, Guggenheim Securities rendered an oral opinion, which was confirmed by delivery of a written opinion dated December 19, 2017, to the Board to the effect that, as of such date and based on and subject to the matters considered, the procedures followed, the assumptions made and various limitations of and qualifications to the review undertaken, the merger consideration was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares).

The full text of Guggenheim Securities’ written opinion, which is attached as Annex D to this proxy statement, is subject to the assumptions, limitations, qualifications and other conditions contained in such opinion and is necessarily based on economic, capital markets and other conditions, and the information made available to Guggenheim Securities, as of the date of such opinion. Guggenheim Securities’ opinion was provided to the Board (in its capacity as such) for its information and assistance in connection with its evaluation of the merger consideration. Kindred encourages you to read the opinion carefully in its entirety. Guggenheim Securities’ opinion and any materials provided in connection therewith did not constitute a recommendation to the Board with respect to the merger, nor does Guggenheim Securities’ opinion constitute advice or a recommendation to any holder of Kindred common stock as to how to vote or act in connection with the merger or otherwise. Guggenheim Securities’ opinion addresses only the fairness, from a financial point of view and as of the date of such opinion, of the merger consideration to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares) to the extent expressly specified in such opinion and does not address any other term, aspect or implication of (i) the merger or the separation (including, without limitation, the form or structure of the merger or the separation), (ii) the merger agreement and the separation agreement or (iii) any other agreement, transaction document or instrument contemplated by the merger agreement or the separation agreement or to be entered into or amended in connection with the merger or the separation. Pursuant to an engagement letter between Kindred and Guggenheim Securities, Kindred has agreed to pay Guggenheim Securities a transaction fee of $17.5 million, $2.5 million of which was paid following the delivery of the Guggenheim Securities opinion, and the remainder of which is contingent upon consummation of the merger.

For a description of the opinion that the Board received from Guggenheim Securities, see “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors” beginning on page [●].

Interests of Kindred’s Executive Officers and Directors in the Merger (see page [●])

In considering the recommendation of the Board, Kindred stockholders should be aware that certain directors and executive officers of Kindred will have interests in the proposed merger that are different from, or in addition to, the interests of Kindred stockholders generally and which may create potential conflicts of interest. The Board was aware of these interests and considered them when it adopted the merger agreement and approved the merger.

These interests include:

9

These interests are discussed in more detail in the section entitled “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Interests of Kindred’s Executive Officers and Directors in the Merger” beginning on page [●].

Financing of the Merger (see page [●])

Parent and HospitalCo Parent have obtained equity and debt financing commitments (in each case, pursuant to the respective commitment letters) for the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement and the separation agreement, the aggregate proceeds of which will be used to fund (i) the consummation of the merger and the other transactions contemplated by the merger agreement and the separation agreement, including the amounts payable under the merger agreement and any fees and expenses incurred in connection therewith, (ii) the repayment in full of all outstanding indebtedness of Kindred and its subsidiaries under its existing credit facilities and (iii) the prepayment, redemption, repurchase, tender offer, consent solicitation, change of control offer, satisfaction or discharge or other retirement in respect of Kindred’s existing senior notes.

Pursuant to equity commitment letters, dated as of December 19, 2017, TPG Partners VII, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“TPG VII”), TPG Kentucky Co-Invest, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, WCAS and certain of its affiliated funds (the “WCAS funds”), Humana and Port-aux-Choix Private Investments Inc. have committed, severally but not jointly, to capitalize Parent and HospitalCo Parent, at or immediately prior to the closing, with an aggregate equity contribution in an amount of $1.940 billion, on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the equity commitment letters.

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Bank of America, N.A., Capital One, National Association, Royal Bank of Canada and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association have committed to provide to Parent, severally but not jointly, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Parent debt commitment letter (as defined on page [●]), debt financing in the aggregate amount of up to $2.115 billion, consisting of a $1.360 billion senior secured first lien term facility, a $280 million senior secured first lien revolving facility and a $475 million senior secured second lien term facility. In addition, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., Bank of America, N.A., Capital One, National Association, Royal Bank of Canada and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association have committed to provide to

10

HospitalCo Parent, severally but not jointly, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the HospitalCo Parent debt commitment letter (as defined on page [●]), debt financing in the aggregate amount of up to $860 million, consisting of a $410 million senior secured term loan facility and a $450 million senior secured asset-based loan facility. The consummation of the merger is not subject to any financing conditions.

Limited Guarantee (see page ([●])

Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in limited guarantees, dated December 19, 2017 (collectively, the “limited guarantees”), each of TPG VII, the WCAS funds, Humana and Port-aux-Choix Private Investments Inc. (collectively, the “Guarantors”) have guaranteed the payment obligations of Parent with respect to (i) the obligation of Parent under the merger agreement to pay the reverse termination fee if the merger agreement is terminated under specified circumstances (see the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Termination Fees and Expenses” beginning on page [●]) and (ii) Parent’s obligation to pay certain interest and expenses and certain reimbursement and indemnification obligations of Parent under the merger agreement, including enforcement costs and expenses related to transactions contemplated by the separation agreement, subject to certain caps and limitations set forth in the merger agreement and the limited guarantees.

The Guarantors’ obligations under the limited guarantees are subject to an aggregate cap equal to $110 million.

Antitrust Review Required for the Merger and Other Regulatory Filings (see page [●])

Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended (the “HSR Act”), we cannot complete the merger until we have given notification and furnished information to the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and until the applicable waiting period has expired or has been terminated. On January 19, 2018, Kindred and an affiliate of TPG each filed a premerger notification and report form under the HSR Act, as a result of which the applicable waiting period under the HSR Act is scheduled to expire on February 20, 2018 at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, unless otherwise earlier terminated or extended if the DOJ or FTC requests additional information and documentary material.

The obligation of the parties to the merger agreement to consummate the merger is also subject to obtaining certain state licensure or regulatory approvals as set forth in the merger agreement.

While we have no reason to believe it will not be possible to complete the antitrust review or obtain the applicable state licensure or regulatory approvals in a timely manner, there is no certainty that these will be completed within the periods of time currently contemplated or that a regulatory challenge to the merger will not be made.

Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences of the Merger (see page [●])

The exchange of Kindred common stock for cash in the merger will be a taxable transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes and may also be taxable under state and local and other tax laws. You should read the section entitled “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences of the Merger” beginning on page [●]. The tax consequences of the merger to you will depend on your particular circumstances. You should consult your tax advisors regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the merger to you in your particular circumstances, as well as tax consequences arising under the laws of any state, local or foreign taxing jurisdiction.

Separation Agreement (see page [●])

Simultaneously with the execution of the merger agreement, Kindred entered into the separation agreement with Parent, HospitalCo Parent and Hospital Merger Sub. Upon the terms and subject to conditions of the

11

separation agreement, promptly following the effective time, the surviving entity will be separated from Kindred’s Homecare Business and acquired by HospitalCo Parent.

The closing of the merger is conditioned on the satisfaction or waiver of the conditions to consummate the separation contemplated by the separation agreement. The rights and obligations of the parties to the separation agreement are governed by the specific terms and conditions of the separation agreement and not by any summary or other information in this proxy statement. Therefore, the information in this proxy statement regarding the separation agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby is qualified in its entirety by reference to the separation agreement, a copy of which is attached as Annex B to this proxy statement and is incorporated herein by reference. We encourage you to read the separation agreement carefully and in its entirety because it is the principal legal agreement that governs the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement.

Kindred stockholders are not required to adopt or approve the separation agreement or the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement, and you are not being asked to vote to adopt or approve the separation agreement or the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement at the special meeting.

Appraisal Rights (see page [●])

Stockholders are entitled to appraisal rights under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “DGCL”), in connection with the merger, provided that stockholders comply with the requirements of Section 262 of the DGCL. Any stockholder who does not vote in favor of the merger proposal and who otherwise complies with the requirements of Section 262 has the right to seek appraisal of his, her or its shares of Kindred common stock and to receive payment in cash for the “fair value” of his, her or its shares of Kindred common stock, exclusive of any element of value arising from the accomplishment or expectation of the merger, as determined by the Delaware Court of Chancery, together with interest, if any, to be paid upon the amount determined to be fair value. The ultimate amount stockholders receive in an appraisal proceeding may be less than, equal to or more than the amount a stockholder would have received under the merger agreement.

To exercise appraisal rights, a stockholder must deliver a written demand for appraisal to Kindred before the vote is taken on the adoption of the merger agreement, must not vote, in person or by proxy, in favor of the proposal to adopt the merger agreement and must continue to hold the shares of Kindred common stock of record from the date of making the demand for appraisal through the effective time. As such, merely voting against, abstaining or failing to vote on the proposal to adopt the merger agreement will not preserve your right to appraisal under the DGCL. Further, because a properly submitted proxy not marked “against” or “abstain” will be voted “for” the proposal to adopt the merger agreement, the submission of a proxy not marked “against” or “abstain” will result in the waiver of appraisal rights. A stockholder’s failure to strictly comply with the procedures specified under the DGCL will result in the loss of such stockholder’s appraisal rights. See the section entitled “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Appraisal Rights” beginning on page [●] and the text of the Delaware appraisal right statute reproduced in its entirety as Annex E to this proxy statement. Only a stockholder of record may submit a demand for appraisal. If you hold your shares of Kindred common stock through a bank, brokerage firm or other nominee and you wish to exercise appraisal rights, you should consult with your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee to determine the appropriate procedures for the making of a demand for appraisal by such bank, brokerage firm or nominee. In view of the complexity of the DGCL, stockholders who may wish to pursue appraisal rights should consult their legal and financial advisors promptly.

Expected Timing of the Merger

We expect to complete the merger in the summer of 2018. However, the merger is subject to antitrust reviews, certain state licensure and regulatory approvals and various other conditions, and it is possible that factors outside of the control of Kindred, Parent or HospitalCo Parent could result in the merger being completed

12

at a later time, or not at all. There may be a substantial amount of time between the special meeting and the completion of the merger. We expect to complete the merger promptly following the receipt of all required clearances and approvals and the satisfaction or, to the extent permitted, waiver of the other conditions to the consummation of the merger.

Restrictions on Solicitation of Takeover Proposals (see page [●])

From the date of the merger agreement until the earlier of the effective time and the valid termination of the merger agreement, subject to the exceptions described below, Kindred may not, and will cause its controlled affiliates and its and their respective officers, directors and employees (and will use its reasonable best efforts to cause its and its controlled affiliates’ other representatives) not to:

Additionally, Kindred must not resolve to do any of the foregoing prohibited activities. Furthermore, Kindred has agreed, and agreed to cause its controlled affiliates and its and their respective officers, directors and employees (and to use its reasonable best efforts to cause its and its controlled affiliates’ other representatives), to cease immediately and cause to be terminated, any and all existing activities, discussions or negotiations, if any, with any third parties with respect to any takeover proposal existing at the time the merger agreement was entered into. Kindred has agreed to use its reasonable best efforts to cause any such third party (or its agents and advisors) in possession of non-public information in respect of Kindred or any of its subsidiaries that was furnished by or on behalf of Kindred and its subsidiaries to return or destroy (and confirm destruction of) all such information, and to terminate access of all persons (other than Parent, Kindred and their respective subsidiaries and representatives) to any “data room” with respect to any takeover proposal.

Notwithstanding the foregoing non-solicitation restrictions, Kindred may waive any standstill or similar agreement solely to the extent necessary to permit a third party to make, on a confidential basis to the Board, a takeover proposal, conditioned on such third party agreeing that Kindred shall not be prohibited from providing any information to Parent regarding any such takeover proposal as required by, and in accordance with, the merger agreement.

Further, notwithstanding the foregoing non-solicitation restrictions and Kindred’s obligations under the merger agreement relating to the special meeting, if prior to obtaining the approval of the merger proposal by Kindred stockholders at the special meeting, Kindred receives a bona fide, unsolicited takeover proposal that did not result from a breach of Kindred’s non-solicitation covenants and that the Board determines in good faith (after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal counsel) constitutes or would reasonably be expected to lead to a superior proposal (as defined in the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Restrictions on Solicitation of Takeover Proposals” beginning on page [●]), the Board, indirectly or through representatives, may:

13

but in each case only if the Board determines in good faith, after consultation with its financial advisors and outside legal counsel, that the failure to take such action would be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties under applicable law.

Kindred has agreed to notify Merger Sub promptly (but in any event within 24 hours after receipt) in the event that it receives any takeover proposal or any inquiry or request for information that would reasonably be expected to lead to a takeover proposal. In such notice, Kindred has agreed to identify the third party making, and details of any material terms and conditions of, any such takeover proposal or inquiry and provide copies of any written proposals, draft agreements and all draft or executed financing commitments and related documentation. Kindred has also agreed to keep Merger Sub reasonably informed on a current basis of the status of any such takeover proposal, including any changes in timing, amount or form of consideration, conditionality or other material terms of (or any other material developments with respect to) any takeover proposal, and to promptly (and in any event no later than 24 hours after receipt), provide Merger Sub copies of any additional or revised written proposals, draft agreements and all draft or executed financing commitments and related documentation, and provide Merger Sub with prior written notice, contemporaneously with notice to the Board, of any meeting of the Board at which the Board is reasonably expected to consider any takeover proposal. Kindred has agreed that it will not enter into any agreement that prohibits it from providing to Merger Sub the information contemplated by the non-solicitation provisions of the merger agreement.

Conditions to the Closing of the Merger (see page [●])

The obligations of the parties to the merger agreement to effect the merger are subject to the satisfaction or, to the extent permitted, waiver of various conditions, including the following:

14

The obligations of Parent, HospitalCo Parent and Merger Sub to effect the merger are subject to the satisfaction or, to the extent permitted, waiver of certain other conditions, including the following:

The obligations of Kindred to effect the merger are subject to the satisfaction or, to the extent permitted, waiver of certain other conditions, including the following:

Termination of the Merger Agreement (see page [●])

Kindred or Merger Sub may terminate the merger agreement under the following circumstances:

15

Merger Sub may terminate the merger agreement by written notice to Kindred:

Kindred may terminate the merger agreement by written notice to Parent and Merger Sub:

Termination Fees and Expenses (see page [●])

Upon termination of the merger agreement, under certain specified circumstances, Kindred may be required to pay a termination fee of $29 million and reimburse the documented out-of-pocket expenses of Parent,

16

HospitalCo Parent and certain of their affiliates in connection with the merger agreement, the separation agreement and the financing up to $10 million, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement. If the merger proposal is submitted to a vote of Kindred stockholders and approval of the merger proposal is not obtained, Kindred will be required to reimburse Merger Sub for the documented out-of-pocket expenses of Parent, HospitalCo Parent and certain of their affiliates in connection with the merger agreement, the separation agreement and the financing up to $7.5 million. Upon termination of the merger agreement, under certain specified circumstances, Parent may be required to pay Kindred a reverse termination fee of $61.5 million and to reimburse certain Kindred expenses, including an expense reimbursement payment equal to $5 million and up to $13.5 million of reasonable and documented out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Kindred in connection with the implementation of the separation transactions, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement. See the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Termination Fees and Expenses” beginning on page [●] for a discussion of the circumstances under which the parties will be required to pay a termination fee and/or reimburse expenses.

Directors’ and Officers’ Indemnification and Insurance (see page [●])

For a period of six years from the effective time, Parent and HospitalCo Parent shall, and shall cause the surviving entity and the surviving entity in the hospital merger to, jointly and severally indemnify and provide advancement of expenses to the current and former officers and directors of Kindred and its subsidiaries as provided for in their respective organizational documents or certain other agreements in effect on the date of the merger agreement. In addition, any such rights related to indemnification or advancement of expenses contained in the relevant organizational documents must be maintained in effect for such six year period without alteration or amendment in any manner adverse to any indemnified party without such indemnified party’s prior written consent, except as required by applicable law. Furthermore, for a period of six years, the surviving entity and the surviving entity in the hospital merger will maintain either Kindred’s existing directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies or insurance policies for the directors and officers that are no less advantageous in the aggregate than Kindred’s existing directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies, subject to the cost limitations set forth in the merger agreement. In lieu of providing such coverage, the surviving entity and the surviving entity in the hospital merger may purchase a six-year “tail policy” containing terms and conditions that are no less advantageous in the aggregate to the insured than the current policies of Kindred’s directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies, subject to the cost limitations set forth in the merger agreement.

Delisting and Deregistration of Kindred Common Stock (see page [●])

As promptly as practicable following the completion of the merger, Kindred common stock will be delisted from the NYSE and deregistered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).

Market Prices of Kindred Common Stock (see page [●])

On December 15, 2017, the last trading day before The Wall Street Journal published an article stating that Kindred was in advanced negotiations with the Consortium regarding a potential sale transaction, the closing price per share of Kindred common stock on the NYSE was $8.60. The closing price of the Kindred common stock on the NYSE on [●], 2018, the most recent practicable date prior to the filing of this proxy statement, was $[●] per share. You are encouraged to obtain current market prices of Kindred common stock in connection with voting your shares of Kindred common stock.

17

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE SPECIAL MEETING AND THE MERGER

The following are brief answers to certain questions that you may have regarding the merger, the special meeting and the proposals being considered at the special meeting. We urge you to carefully read the remainder of this proxy statement because the information in this section does not provide all of the information that might be important to you with respect to the merger and the special meeting. Additional important information is also contained in the annexes attached to this proxy statement and the documents referred to or incorporated by reference into this proxy statement.

You are also being asked to vote on a proposal to approve on a non-binding, advisory basis, certain compensation that will or may be paid by Kindred to its named executive officers that is based on or otherwise relates to the merger and on a proposal to approve the adjournment of the special meeting, from time to time, if necessary or appropriate, for the purpose of soliciting additional votes for the approval of the merger proposal.

This proxy statement, which you should read carefully, contains important information about the merger, the merger agreement and the special meeting of our stockholders and the matters to be voted on thereat. The enclosed materials allow you to submit a proxy to vote your shares without attending the special meeting and to ensure that your shares are represented and voted at the special meeting.

Your vote is very important. Even if you plan to attend the special meeting, we encourage you to submit a proxy as soon as possible.

18

Stockholders may also be asked to transact such other business as may properly be brought before the special meeting or any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting, by or at the direction of the Board.

19

20

As of the record date for the special meeting, the directors and executive officers of Kindred owned, in the aggregate, [●] shares of Kindred common stock, representing [●]% of the issued and outstanding Kindred common stock entitled to vote at the special meeting.

21

Even if you plan to attend the special meeting, we encourage you to submit a proxy in advance by Internet, telephone or mail so that your shares will be voted if you later decide not to attend the special meeting. Telephone and Internet facilities for the submission of a proxy to vote shares will be available 24 hours a day and will close at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on [●], 2018. Proxy cards mailed with respect to shares must be received no later than [●], 2018 in order to be counted in the vote.

If you beneficially own your shares and receive a voting instruction form, you can vote by following the instructions on your voting instruction form. Please refer to information from your bank, broker or other nominee on how to submit voting instructions. Stockholders who own their shares in “street name” are not able to vote at the special meeting unless they have a proxy, executed in their favor, from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving them the right to vote the shares.

If you properly sign and return your proxy card but do not mark the boxes showing how your shares should be voted on a matter, the shares represented by your properly signed proxy will be voted as recommended by the Board with respect to each proposal.

22

If you hold shares in street name, you may submit new voting instructions by contacting your bank, broker or other nominee. You may also change your vote or revoke your proxy in person at the special meeting if you obtain a proxy, executed in your favor, from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving you the right to vote the shares.

If you submit a proxy or provide instructions to vote your shares and do not thereafter revoke such proxy or change such instructions in accordance with one of the methods set forth above, your shares will be represented and voted at the special meeting.

23

You will have the right to receive the merger consideration if the merger proposal is approved and the merger is completed even if your shares are not voted at the special meeting. However, if your shares are not voted at the special meeting, it will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal.

Failure to strictly comply with all procedures required by Section 262 of the DGCL will result in a loss of your right to appraisal. We encourage you to read these provisions carefully and in their entirety and, in

24

view of their complexity, to promptly consult with your legal and financial advisors if you wish to pursue your appraisal rights in connection with the merger.

Other Stock Awards. Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and vested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock

25

in respect of such stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time, other than those unvested awards held by certain listed persons (i.e. the Kindred executive officers and other agreed-upon members of management), will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such Kindred stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. For purposes of this cancellation and conversion of unvested Kindred stock awards, each such Kindred stock award subject to performance-based vesting conditions shall be deemed earned at the target performance level.

Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time and held by listed persons will be converted into a replacement cash award for an amount equal to the product of (x) the merger consideration and (y) the number of shares of Kindred common stock to which such Kindred stock award relates (as determined in accordance herewith). Each replacement cash award will be subject to the same terms and conditions applicable to the Kindred stock award immediately prior to the effective time (including service-based vesting on the original vesting schedule and payment on the originally scheduled vesting date of such award), except that (i) any performance-based conditions to which such Kindred stock award was subject shall be deemed earned at the target performance level so that the replacement cash award shall be subject to service-based vesting only and (ii) if such listed person’s employment is terminated by Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent or their respective affiliates, as applicable, without “cause” or by such listed person for “good reason” during the service-based vesting period applicable to such listed person’s replacement cash award, such replacement cash award shall vest and become payable in full as of the date of such termination.

105 Madison Avenue

New York, New York 10016

Call Toll-Free (800) 322-2885

(212) 929-5500 (Call Collect)

Email: proxy@mackenziepartners.com

If your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee holds your shares, you should also call your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee for additional information.

26

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This proxy statement contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Some of these statements can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “approximate,” “believe,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “will,” “intend,” “hope,” “may,” “potential,” “upside,” “seek,” “continue” and other similar expressions. Kindred cautions readers of this proxy statement that such forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain, and stockholders and other potential investors must recognize that actual results may differ materially from Kindred’s expectations as a result of a variety of factors. Such forward-looking statements are based upon management’s current expectations and include known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which Kindred is unable to predict or control, that may cause Kindred’s actual results, performance, or plans to differ materially from any future results, performance or plans expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.

Factors that could cause Kindred’s actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the risks detailed in our filings with the SEC, including in our most recent filings on Forms 10-K and 10-Q, factors and matters described in this proxy statement, and the following factors:

27

Consequently, all of the forward-looking statements that we make in this proxy statement are qualified by the information contained herein or contained in Kindred’s other public filings with the SEC, including (1) the information contained under this caption, and (2) the information contained under the captions “Risk Factors,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and information in our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in Kindred’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 28, 2017 and in Kindred’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q filed on May 9, 2017, August 9, 2017 and November 6, 2017. No assurance can be given that these are all of the factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from the forward-looking statements.

Kindred’s forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this proxy statement or as of the date they are made. Kindred disclaims any intent or obligation to update any “forward looking statement” made in this proxy statement, whether as a result of new information, changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events, changes to future operating results over time or otherwise.

28

THE PARTIES TO THE MERGER

Kindred Healthcare, Inc.

Kindred Healthcare, Inc.

680 South Fourth Street

Louisville, Kentucky 40202

(502) 596-7300

Kindred is a healthcare services company that through its subsidiaries operates a home health, hospice and community care business, TC hospitals, IRFs, and a contract rehabilitation services business across the United States. As of September 30, 2017, our Kindred at Home division primarily provided home health, hospice, and community care services from 609 sites of service in 40 states. Our hospital division operated 77 TC hospitals (certified as LTAC hospitals under the Medicare program) in 18 states. Our Kindred Rehabilitation Services division operated 19 IRFs and 101 hospital-based acute rehabilitation units (certified as IRFs), and provided rehabilitation services primarily in hospitals and long-term care settings in 45 states.

Kindred is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware in 1998 and headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. Our common stock is traded on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “KND”. Our corporate web address is www.kindredhealthcare.com. The information provided on the Kindred website is not part of this proxy statement and is not incorporated in this proxy statement by reference hereby or by any other reference to Kindred’s website provided in this proxy statement.

Additional information about Kindred is contained in our public filings with the SEC. See the section entitled “Where You Can Find Additional Information.”

Kentucky Hospital Holdings, LLC (HospitalCo Parent)

c/o TPG Global, LLC

ATTN: General Counsel

301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

(817) 871-4000

HospitalCo Parent is a Delaware limited liability company that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement, separation agreement and related agreements and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. HospitalCo Parent has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements. Upon completion of the transactions contemplated thereby, Kindred will be an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of HospitalCo Parent.

As of immediately following the transactions contemplated in the separation agreement, HospitalCo Parent will be controlled by affiliates of TPG and WCAS. As of the date hereof, HospitalCo Parent is controlled by affiliates of TPG.

TPG is a leading global alternative asset firm founded in 1992 with more than $79 billion of assets under management and offices in Austin, Beijing, Boston, Dallas, Fort Worth, Hong Kong, Houston, London, Luxembourg, Melbourne, Moscow, Mumbai, New York, San Francisco, Seoul and Singapore. TPG’s investment platforms are across a wide range of asset classes, including private equity, growth venture, real estate, credit and public equity. TPG aims to build dynamic products and options for its investors while also instituting discipline and operational excellence across the investment strategy and performance of its portfolio.

29

Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe is a private equity firm that focuses its investment activity in two target industries: technology and healthcare. Since its founding in 1979, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe has organized 16 limited partnerships with total capital of over $22 billion. It is currently investing via an equity fund, Welsh, Carson, Anderson and Stowe XII, L.P., which (together with its affiliated co-investment funds) closed on over $3.3 billion in commitments. Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe has a current portfolio of approximately 20 companies with 2017 annual revenues totaling over $16 billion. Its strategy is to partner with outstanding management teams and build value for its investors through a combination of operational improvements, internal growth initiatives and strategic acquisitions.

Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc. (Parent)

c/o TPG Global, LLC

ATTN: General Counsel

301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

(817) 871-4000

Parent is a Delaware corporation that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement, separation agreement and related agreements and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. Parent has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements.

As of immediately following the transactions contemplated in the separation agreement, Parent will be controlled by affiliates of each of TPG and WCAS and Humana. As of the date hereof, Parent is controlled by affiliates of TPG.

Humana is a leading health and well-being company focused on making it easy for people to achieve their best health with clinical excellence through coordinated care. Its strategy integrates care delivery, the member experience and clinical and consumer insights to encourage engagement, behavior change, proactive clinical outreach and wellness for the millions of people it serves across the country. As of September 30, 2017, it had approximately 13.8 million members in its medical benefit plans, as well as approximately 6.9 million members in its specialty products.

Kentucky Homecare Merger Sub, Inc. (Merger Sub)

c/o TPG Global, LLC

ATTN: General Counsel

301 Commerce Street, Suite 3300

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

(817) 871-4000

Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation and an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Parent that was formed on December 11, 2017 solely for the purpose of entering into the merger agreement and completing the transactions contemplated thereby. Merger Sub has not conducted any business operations other than in connection with the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, separation agreement and the related agreements.

30

THE SPECIAL MEETING

This proxy statement is being provided to Kindred stockholders as part of a solicitation by the Board of proxies for use at the special meeting to be held at the time and place specified below, and at any properly convened meeting following an adjournment or postponement of the special meeting.

Date, Time and Place

The special meeting is scheduled to be held at [●] on [●], 2018 at [●], Eastern Time.

Purpose of the Special Meeting

At the special meeting, Kindred stockholders will be asked to consider and vote on the following proposals:

Stockholders may also be asked to transact such other business as may properly be brought before the special meeting or any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting, by or at the direction of the Board.

The holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Kindred common stock entitled to vote must vote to adopt the merger agreement at the special meeting as a condition to the completion of the merger. If Kindred stockholders fail to approve the merger proposal, the merger will not occur. The vote on the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal is a vote separate and apart from the vote to approve the merger proposal. Accordingly, a stockholder may vote to approve the merger proposal and vote not to approve the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal, and vice versa. Because the vote on the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal is only advisory in nature, it will not be binding on Kindred, Parent or the surviving entity. Accordingly, because Kindred is contractually obligated to pay such merger-related compensation, the compensation will be payable, subject only to the conditions applicable thereto, if the merger proposal is approved, regardless of the outcome of the advisory vote.

Other than the matters described above, Kindred does not expect a vote to be taken on any other matters at the special meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. However, if any other matters are properly brought before the special meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof for consideration, the holders of the proxies will have discretion to vote on such matters in accordance with their best judgment.

Recommendation of the Board

The Board has determined that the merger, the merger agreement and the other transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, are fair to, and in the best interests, of Kindred and its stockholders and has approved and declared advisable the merger, the merger agreement, the separation agreement and the other transactions contemplated thereby. The approval of the Board was unanimous, other than Dr. Sharad Mansukani, who recused himself from the Board’s deliberations over and voting regarding the merger because Dr. Mansukani serves as a

31

Senior Advisor to TPG. The Board made its determination after consultation with its outside legal counsel and financial advisors and consideration of a number of factors more fully described in the section entitled “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Recommendation of the Board and Reasons for the Merger” beginning on page [●].

The Board recommends that Kindred stockholders vote “FOR” the merger proposal, “FOR” the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and “FOR” the adjournment proposal.

Record Date; Stockholders Entitled to Vote

Only holders of record of Kindred common stock at the close of business on [●], 2018, the record date for the special meeting, will be entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the special meeting or any adjournments or postponements of the special meeting. On the record date, [●] shares of Kindred common stock were issued and outstanding, held by approximately [●] holders of record.

Holders of record of Kindred common stock are entitled to one vote on each matter submitted to a vote at the special meeting for each share of Kindred common stock they own of record on the record date. A complete list of stockholders entitled to vote at the special meeting will be available for inspection at Kindred’s principal place of business during regular business hours for a period of no less than 10 days before the special meeting and at the special meeting.

Quorum

As of the close of business on the record date, there were [●] shares of Kindred common stock outstanding. Under our bylaws, the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Kindred common stock entitled to vote on a matter at the special meeting on the record date, whether in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum. Accordingly, [●] shares of Kindred common stock must be present or represented by proxy at the special meeting to constitute a quorum. There must be a quorum for business to be conducted at the special meeting. Failure of a quorum to be represented at the special meeting will necessitate an adjournment or postponement of the special meeting and may subject Kindred to additional expense.

If you submit (and do not thereafter revoke) a properly executed proxy card, even if you abstain from voting, your shares of Kindred common stock will be counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present at the special meeting. In the event that a quorum is not present at the special meeting or additional votes must be solicited to adopt the merger agreement, the meeting may be adjourned or postponed to solicit additional proxies.

Required Vote

The approval of the merger proposal requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock outstanding on the record date and entitled to vote thereon.

The approval of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal (on a non-binding basis) requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereon.

The approval of the adjournment proposal requires the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereon.

As of the record date, [●] shares of Kindred common stock were issued and outstanding, held by approximately [●] holders of record.

32

Abstentions and Broker Non-Votes

An abstention occurs when a stockholder attends a meeting, either in person or by proxy, but abstains from voting. At the special meeting, abstentions will be counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists. Abstaining from voting will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal, the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and the adjournment proposal.

If no instruction as to how to vote is given (including no instruction to abstain from voting) in an executed, duly returned and not revoked proxy, the proxy will be voted “FOR” (i) approval of the merger proposal, (ii) approval of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal and (iii) approval of the adjournment proposal.

Broker non-votes are shares held in “street name” by banks, brokerage firms or other nominees that are present or represented by proxy at the special meeting, but with respect to which the bank, brokerage firm or other nominee is not instructed by the beneficial owner of such shares how to vote on a particular proposal and such bank, brokerage firm or other nominee does not have discretionary voting power on such proposal. Because, under NYSE rules, banks, brokerage firms or other nominees holding shares in “street name” do not have discretionary voting authority with respect to any of the three proposals described in this proxy statement, if a beneficial owner of shares of Kindred common stock held in “street name” does not give voting instructions to the bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, then those shares will not be permitted under NYSE rules to be voted at the special meeting, and thus will not be counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting. The vote to approve the merger proposal is based on the total number of shares of Kindred common stock outstanding on the record date, not just the shares that are counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting. As a result, if you fail to issue voting instructions to your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, it will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal, but will have no effect on the approval of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal or the adjournment proposal.

Failure to Vote

If you are a stockholder of record and you do not sign and return your proxy card by mail or vote over the Internet, by telephone or in person at the special meeting, your shares will not be voted at the special meeting, will not be counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting and will not be counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists.

As discussed above, under NYSE rules, brokers and other record holders do not have discretionary voting authority with respect to any of the three proposals described in this proxy statement. Accordingly, if you are the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name” and you do not issue voting instructions to your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, your shares will not be voted at the special meeting and will not be counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting or counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists.

A failure to vote will have no effect on the outcome of the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal or the adjournment proposal, assuming that a quorum exists. However, the vote to approve the merger proposal is based on the total number of shares of Kindred common stock outstanding on the record date, not just the shares that are counted as present in person or by proxy at the special meeting. As a result, if you fail to vote your shares, it will have the same effect as a vote “AGAINST” the merger proposal.

Voting by Kindred’s Directors and Executive Officers

On the record date, directors and executive officers of Kindred and their affiliates were entitled to vote [●] shares of Kindred common stock, or approximately [●]% of the shares of Kindred common stock issued and outstanding on that date. Kindred’s directors and executive officers have informed us that they intend to vote their shares in favor of the merger proposal and the other proposals to be considered at the special meeting, although none of Kindred’s directors and executive officers is obligated to do so.

33

Voting at the Special Meeting

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, you are considered a “stockholder of record.” Stockholders of record can vote their shares of Kindred common stock in the following four ways: (i) by indicating your vote by completing, signing and dating the proxy card where indicated and by mailing or otherwise returning the card in the envelope that will be provided to you, (ii) by submitting your proxy by telephone by dialing the toll-free number [●], (iii) by submitting your proxy over the Internet by going to [●] or (iv) by attending the special meeting and voting your shares in person. Even if you plan to attend the special meeting, Kindred encourages you to submit a proxy in advance by Internet, telephone or mail so that your shares will be voted if you later decide not to attend the special meeting. Votes cast in person or by proxy at the special meeting will be tabulated by the inspectors of election appointed for the special meeting, who also will determine whether a quorum is present. Telephone and Internet facilities for the submission of proxies to vote shares will be available 24 hours a day and will close at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on [●], 2018. Proxy cards mailed with respect to shares must be received no later than [●], 2018 in order to be counted in the vote.

If your shares are held by your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name” and you will receive a form from your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee seeking instruction from you as to how your shares should be voted. You should instruct your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee how to vote your shares on each proposal in accordance with your voting instruction form. If you beneficially own your shares and receive a voting instruction form, you can vote by following the instructions on your voting instruction form. Please refer to information from your bank, broker or other nominee on how to submit voting instructions. Stockholders who hold their shares in “street name” are not able to vote at the special meeting unless they have a proxy, executed in their favor, from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving them the right to vote the shares at the special meeting.

Stockholders who are entitled to vote at the special meeting may attend the special meeting. If you are a stockholder of record, you should bring the proxy card and proof of identification. If you are a beneficial owner of shares held in “street name,” you should present proof of ownership of Kindred common stock as of the record date, such as a bank or brokerage account statement, along with proof of identification.

34

Revocation of Proxies

You can change or revoke your proxy at any time before the final vote at the special meeting. If you are the stockholder of record, you may change or revoke your proxy by:

If you hold shares in street name, you may submit new voting instructions by contacting your bank, broker or other nominee. You may also change your vote or revoke your proxy in person at the special meeting if you obtain a proxy, executed in your favor, from the stockholder of record (bank, brokerage firm or other nominee) giving you the right to vote the shares.

If you submit a proxy or provide instructions to vote your shares and do not thereafter revoke such proxy or change such instructions in accordance with one of the methods set forth above, your shares will be represented and voted at the special meeting in accordance with your instructions.

Solicitation of Proxies

The Board is soliciting your proxy, and Kindred will bear the cost of soliciting proxies. MacKenzie has been retained to assist with the solicitation of proxies and provide related proxy advisory services. MacKenzie will be paid an initial fee of $50,000 and $15,000 quarterly thereafter and will be reimbursed for its reasonable fees and expenses for these services in connection with the special meeting. Kindred will also indemnify MacKenzie for certain losses arising out of these services. Solicitation initially will be made by mail. Kindred and MacKenzie also will request that banks, brokerage firms, and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries send proxy materials to the beneficial owners of shares of Kindred common stock and will, if requested, reimburse them for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses in doing so.

Adjournment

In addition to the merger proposal and the named executive officer merger-related compensation proposal, Kindred stockholders are also being asked to approve the adjournment proposal, which will enable the adjournment of the special meeting for the purpose of soliciting additional votes in favor of the merger proposal if there are not sufficient votes at the time of the special meeting to approve the merger proposal. If a quorum is not present, the person presiding at the special meeting or the stockholders holding a majority of the shares of Kindred common stock present in person or by proxy at the special meeting and entitled to vote thereat may adjourn the special meeting from time to time until a quorum shall be present. If the adjournment is for more than 30 days, or if a new record date is set for the adjourned meeting, a notice of the adjourned meeting shall be given to each stockholder of record entitled to vote at the meeting. In addition, the special meeting could be postponed before it commences, subject to the terms of the merger agreement. If the special meeting is adjourned or postponed, stockholders who have already submitted their proxies will be able to revoke them at any time prior to the final vote on the proposals. If you return a proxy and do not indicate how you wish to vote on the adjournment proposal, your shares will be voted in favor of the adjournment proposal.

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the adjournment proposal, if necessary or appropriate, to solicit additional proxies.

35

Other Information

You should not send documents representing Kindred common stock with the proxy card. If the merger is completed, the paying agent for the merger will send you transmittal materials and instructions for exchanging your shares of Kindred common stock for the consideration to be paid to the former Kindred stockholders in connection with the merger.

Questions

If you have more questions about the merger or how to submit your proxy, or if you need additional copies of this proxy statement or the enclosed proxy card or voting instructions, please contact MacKenzie, our proxy solicitor, by calling toll-free at (800) 322-2885 or collect at (212) 929-5500.

36

THE MERGER PROPOSAL

(PROPOSAL 1)

The discussion of the merger in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the merger agreement, a copy of which is attached to this proxy statement as Annex A and hereby is incorporated by reference into this proxy statement.

Structure of the Merger

Subject to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement and in accordance with the DGCL, at the effective time, Merger Sub will merge with and into Kindred, the separate corporate existence of Merger Sub will cease and Kindred will survive the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent.

What Stockholders Will Receive in the Merger

At the effective time, each outstanding share of Kindred common stock (other than excluded shares) will be automatically converted into the right to receive $9.00 in cash, without interest and subject to any applicable withholding taxes. After the merger is completed, holders of Kindred common stock will have only the right to receive a cash payment in respect of their shares of Kindred common stock, and will no longer have any rights as holders of Kindred common stock, including voting or other rights. Shares of Kindred common stock held by HospitalCo Parent, Parent, Merger Sub or Kindred (as treasury stock or otherwise) and their respective direct or indirect wholly owned affiliates will be cancelled at the effective time.

Treatment of Kindred Equity Awards

Stock Options. Each Kindred option that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time, whether or not then vested or exercisable, will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive an amount in cash equal to the excess, if any, of the merger consideration over the exercise price of such option, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Any Kindred option that has an exercise price that is equal to or greater than the merger consideration will be cancelled without consideration.

Other Stock Awards. Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and vested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time, other than those unvested awards held by certain listed persons (i.e. the Kindred executive officers and other agreed-upon members of management), will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such Kindred stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. For purposes of this cancellation and conversion of unvested Kindred stock awards, each such Kindred stock award subject to performance-based vesting conditions shall be deemed earned at the target performance level.

Each Kindred stock award that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time and held by listed persons will be converted into a replacement cash award for an amount equal to the product of (x) the merger consideration and (y) the number of shares of Kindred common stock to which such Kindred stock award relates. Each replacement cash award will be subject to the same terms and conditions applicable to the Kindred stock award immediately prior to the effective time (including service-based vesting on the original vesting schedule and payment on the originally scheduled vesting date of such award), except that (i) any performance-based conditions to which such Kindred stock award was subject shall be deemed earned at the target performance level so that the replacement cash award shall be subject to service-based vesting only and

37

(ii) if such listed person’s employment is terminated by Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent or their respective affiliates, as applicable, without “cause” or by such listed person for “good reason” during the service-based vesting period applicable to such listed person’s replacement cash award, such replacement cash award shall vest and become payable in full as of the date of such termination.

Effects on Kindred if the Merger Is Not Completed

If the merger proposal is not approved by Kindred stockholders or if the merger is not completed for any other reason, Kindred stockholders will not receive any payment for their shares in connection with the merger. Instead, Kindred will remain an independent public company and shares of Kindred common stock will continue to be listed and traded on the NYSE. In addition, if the merger is not completed, Kindred expects that management will operate Kindred’s business in a manner similar to that in which it is being operated today and that Kindred stockholders will continue to be subject to the same risks and opportunities to which they are currently subject, including, without limitation, risks related to laws and regulations affecting our industry, as well as the evolving healthcare regulatory environment and adverse economic conditions.

Furthermore, if the merger is not completed, and depending on the circumstances that would have caused the merger not to be completed, the price of Kindred common stock may decline. If that were to occur, it is uncertain when, if ever, the price of Kindred common stock would return to the price at which it trades as of the date of this proxy statement.

Accordingly, if the merger is not completed, there can be no assurance as to the effect of these risks and opportunities on the future value of your shares of Kindred common stock. If the merger is not completed, the Board will continue to evaluate and review Kindred’s business operations, properties, dividend policy and capitalization, among other things, make such changes as are deemed appropriate, and continue to seek to identify strategic alternatives to enhance stockholder value. If the merger proposal is not approved by Kindred stockholders or if the merger is not completed for any other reason, there can be no assurance that any other transaction acceptable to Kindred will be offered or that Kindred’s business, prospects or results of operation will not be adversely impacted.

Further, upon termination of the merger agreement, under certain specified circumstances, Kindred may be required to pay an aggregate termination fee of $29 million to TPG VII Management, LLC (or its designee), Port-aux-Choix Private Investments Inc., WCAS Management Corporation (or its designee) and Humana pursuant to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement. Upon termination of the merger agreement, under certain specified circumstances, Parent may be required to pay Kindred a reverse termination fee of $61.5 million pursuant to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement. See the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Termination Fees and Expenses” beginning on page [●] for a discussion of the circumstances under which either party will be required to pay a termination fee.

Background of the Merger

The Board, together with Kindred’s senior management, regularly reviews and assesses Kindred’s performance, stock price, risks, opportunities and strategy in light of the current business and economic environment, as well as evolving industry dynamics as they may affect Kindred’s long-term strategic goals and plans. The Board and Kindred senior management have identified, and from time to time discussed and evaluated, the significant risks associated with operating as an independent, standalone public company, including risks associated with the evolving healthcare regulatory environment across its businesses, risks associated with Kindred’s leverage profile and general operational and industry headwinds faced by Kindred, including shortages of nurses and other care givers, wage and benefit pressures, patient volume challenges for post-acute providers, the operational challenges of managing a business as complex as Kindred’s on the public markets and the increasing competitive intensity of the sectors in which Kindred operates. Additionally, from time to time, the Board and senior management, together with their legal and financial advisors, review and

38

evaluate Kindred’s strategic opportunities for business combinations, acquisitions and other financial and strategic alternatives with a view to maximizing stockholder value.

During the spring and summer of 2016, Kindred received inquiries from several private equity firms regarding potential strategic transactions, and, at the direction of the Board, Kindred’s senior management held separate initial exploratory discussions with representatives of four private equity firms (“Financial Party A”, “Financial Party B”, “Financial Party C” and “Financial Party D”) in response to these inquiries.

In early June 2016, Mr. Breier, Kindred’s President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board, met with representatives from Financial Party A, who expressed an interest in discussing a potential going-private transaction in respect of Kindred. Financial Party A did not discuss consideration or any transaction details but expressed a high level of interest in a potential transaction and requested an opportunity to conduct due diligence based on non-public information.

On July 14, 2016, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management and Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP (“Cleary Gottlieb”), Kindred’s outside legal counsel, to discuss Financial Party A’s expressed interest in a potential strategic transaction and whether Kindred should enter into a confidentiality agreement with, and provide preliminary due diligence information to, Financial Party A to assist it in determining whether such a transaction could be viable. The Board and senior management, with input from Cleary Gottlieb, discussed whether it was then an appropriate time to explore a potential strategic transaction, and potential alternatives in the event Kindred received an offer from Financial Party A. In this regard, the Board discussed Kindred’s stock performance and the evolving operational, regulatory and reimbursement environment facing Kindred. The Board also discussed Kindred’s leverage and the limits on its available capital for growth. The Board further discussed expectations regarding levels of interest among other potential bidders and whether Kindred should conduct preliminary meetings with one or more potential bidders.

Cleary Gottlieb discussed the Board’s fiduciary duties generally and in connection with their review of Financial Party A’s interest and the Board’s consideration of potential strategic alternatives. In addition, the Board discussed the risks of proceeding with these discussions, including the risk of such discussions leading to the announcement of an unsolicited proposal to acquire Kindred, as well as other risks of potential leaks that could be detrimental to Kindred. The Board also discussed debt breakage costs that might arise in various transactions as well as restrictions under the Ventas master lease agreement that may apply, including that change of control transactions would require the consent of Ventas. After discussion, the Board determined that, in the interest of exploring options to maximize stockholder value, Kindred should enter into a confidentiality agreement with, and facilitate preliminary due diligence by, Financial Party A. The Board also discussed potential strategies to facilitate a bidding process, should a transaction appear viable, and authorized Mr. Breier to continue his planned discussions with Financial Party B, Financial Party C and Financial Party D, each of which had expressed potential interest in exploratory discussions regarding a potential strategic transaction. The Board also instructed representatives of Kindred senior management not to engage in, and not to permit other members of Kindred management to engage in, discussions with potential bidders regarding the terms of post-transaction employment or equity participation without the prior approval of the Board.

During this period, Mr. Breier also had preliminary discussions with representatives of Guggenheim Securities, Kindred’s long-time financial advisor, regarding Kindred’s potential interest in exploring a sale or other strategic alternatives.

On July 18, 2016, Kindred and Financial Party A entered into a mutual confidentiality agreement, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement further prohibited Financial Party A from engaging in any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

39

On August 2, 2016, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. At the invitation of the Board, representatives of Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb joined a portion of the meeting to discuss developments with respect to Financial Party A. Representatives of Guggenheim Securities discussed the amount and scope of due diligence Financial Party A had conducted to date. Guggenheim Securities then informed the Board that Financial Party A contacted Mr. Breier and indicated that Financial Party A was not prepared to proceed further with a potential transaction, given the uncertainty related to new LTAC reimbursement criteria and Financial Party A’s inability to reach a valuation of Kindred’s common stock in excess of Kindred’s then-current market price. In light of Financial Party A’s decision, the Board withheld making any further determination as to whether to proceed with a broader sale process at such time, but authorized Mr. Breier to continue to engage in discussions with Financial Party A, Financial Party B, Financial Party C and Financial Party D in order to gauge interest in a potential transaction.

During the months of October and November, 2016, Mr. Breier met with representatives of each of Financial Party A, Financial Party B, Financial Party C and Financial Party D and provided a general overview of Kindred’s integrated care strategy and each of its businesses. He also discussed risks to Kindred, including the new LTAC reimbursement criteria, and the difficulties of executing Kindred’s strategic plan and risk mitigation efforts while publicly traded. At no time during any of these meetings did the participants discuss price, valuation or other terms of a potential transaction or disclose any non-public information.

On November 7, 2016, during Kindred’s earnings release call, Mr. Breier announced Kindred’s strategic plan to exit the skilled nursing facility business. To that end, Kindred initiated a process to sell all of its owned and leased nursing centers (the “SNF divestiture”).

On November 14, 2016, Kindred entered into definitive agreements with Ventas to provide Kindred with the option to acquire the real estate for all 36 skilled nursing facilities then leased from Ventas for aggregate cash consideration of $700 million. At the same time, Ventas agreed to amend its master lease with Kindred to permit Kindred to undergo certain change of control transactions without requiring Ventas’ prior consent, subject to, among other things, Ventas’ receipt of such $700 million payment, the satisfaction of certain financial covenants, and the payment of a fee to Ventas equal to 10% of the base rent in effect under the Ventas master lease as of the consummation of any such change of control transaction.

On November 28, 2016, a consortium comprised of Financial Party B and two other private equity firms (“Financial Party E” and “Financial Party F”, respectively, and which we refer to collectively as the “Financial Party B consortium”) submitted to Mr. Breier and Ms. Phyllis R. Yale, Chair of the Board, a written proposal, based on publicly available information, to acquire Kindred for $10.50 to $12.00 per share in cash, which represented a 57% to 79% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on November 25, 2016. The Financial Party B consortium proposed to undertake further business due diligence to confirm its price, followed by customary legal, accounting and compliance due diligence.

On December 1, 2016, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management. At this meeting, Mr. Breier discussed the Financial Party B consortium’s November 28 proposal. Mr. Breier highlighted that only public information had been discussed with the Financial Party B consortium given that Kindred had not entered into a confidentiality agreement with the parties. Representatives of senior management reviewed the fiduciary duties of the Board in the context of their consideration of strategic alternatives and noted that if the Board wished to pursue a potential transaction involving Kindred, the Board should consider engaging one or more financial advisors to assist with evaluation of such a transaction. Next, Mr. Breier reviewed Kindred’s financial model for the fiscal years 2017 through 2021 and discussed the key drivers and assumptions contained therein. In particular, Mr. Breier noted that the 2018 estimates assumed a full exit from the skilled nursing facility business and related overhead reductions. The Board authorized senior management to make arrangements to engage one or more financial advisors to prepare an evaluation of Kindred’s strategic alternatives. The Board also authorized Kindred to enter into confidentiality agreements with, and facilitate preliminary non-public due diligence by, the Financial Party B consortium.

40

On December 13 and 14, 2016, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. Also present, at the invitation of the Board, were representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. Guggenheim Securities was currently acting as financial advisor to Kindred in connection with the SNF divestiture, and representatives of Barclays had been invited by the Board to assist in reviewing potential strategic alternatives. At this meeting, the Board discussed with senior management and the Board’s advisers the challenges facing Kindred and its competitors, Kindred’s recent stock price performance, analysts’ perspectives of Kindred and its ongoing initiatives and the valuation of Kindred and its peers. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred. The Board and representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors discussed that (i) the shares of diversified healthcare companies often trade at a discount relative to the sum of the intrinsic values of such companies’ respective business lines and (ii) the sum of the intrinsic values of Kindred’s business lines in its entirety was not necessarily indicative of the value that would be obtained in a series of divestiture, spin-off or other business separation transactions, because such sum of intrinsic values would not reflect all potentially significant friction costs that would be associated with separating Kindred’s business lines, including dis-synergies, potential tax leakage and debt breakage costs. The Board then discussed, among other things, a variety of potential strategic alternatives, including executing the stand-alone plan, raising equity to delever or pursuing divestitures, acquisitions or a change of control transaction, including by either a private equity or strategic buyer, or group of one or more private equity and/or strategic buyers. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed the proposal made by the Financial Party B consortium and discussed with the Board potential approaches for assessing potential strategic alternatives, including other parties that may have an interest in pursuing a transaction. Cleary Gottlieb discussed with the Board the Board’s fiduciary duties in connection with a potential sale of Kindred and the differing incentives that senior management may face if Kindred pursued a transaction with a private equity buyer as compared to a strategic buyer.

Following further discussion, the Board instructed senior management to proceed with a process to solicit proposals for a possible sale of Kindred. The Board indicated that the process should be designed to create a competitive dynamic, and should target bidders with both the ability to understand the complexities of Kindred’s businesses and the capital necessary to pursue a transaction. The Board also discussed the qualifications and experience of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities, as well as their proposed fees. Based on various factors, including each bank’s reputation and experience as an investment banking firm, their respective knowledge of the healthcare services industry generally and Kindred’s business and operations and other respective capabilities and strengths, and after making the determination that having two financial advisors who had deep experience in the healthcare services industry would be conducive to maximizing stockholder value, the Board determined to engage both banks as co-advisers in connection with a potential transaction. The Board also established a transaction committee (the “Transaction Committee”) comprised of four non-executive directors, Ms. Yale and Messrs. Paul J. Diaz, Joel Ackerman and Richard Goodman, to provide oversight of and advice to senior management with respect to Kindred’s evaluation of potential strategic alternatives.

On December 14, 2016, Kindred entered into confidentiality agreements with each of Financial Party B, Financial Party E and Financial Party F. These confidentiality agreements contained customary confidentiality provisions and 18-month standstill provisions and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. These confidentiality agreements also permitted Financial Party B, Financial Party E and Financial Party F to act as co-investors and further prohibited each of Financial Party B, Financial Party E and Financial Party F from engaging in any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On December 16, 2016, Kindred entered into an engagement letter with each of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to act as financial advisors to Kindred in connection with its evaluation of strategic alternatives, including a potential sale of Kindred. Prior to their engagement, representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities both independently disclosed to the Board that Barclays and Guggenheim Securities had relationships with certain of the potential transaction counterparties with whom Kindred had been or was likely to be in

41

contact and stated that they would provide a customary relationships disclosure letter if the Board decided to proceed to the next phase of a strategic review process.

Also on December 16, 2016, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss a potential process to solicit bids for Kindred, including prospective bidders and a timeline for such process. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities provided information about potentially interested buyers, including both private equity buyers and strategic buyers. The Transaction Committee, following discussion with Kindred’s financial advisors, directed senior management to target a set of prospective buyers that would create sufficient competitive tension for a sale process, while being manageable in scope.

Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors classified the pool of potentially interested private equity firms based on, among other factors: prior expressed interest in evaluating a transaction with Kindred; access to sufficient capital; ability to lead a transaction of this size and complexity; and experience in the healthcare sector. Representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities then discussed the potential interest of strategic buyers in the post-acute industry and that, based on factors related to the industry generally and specific to such potential strategic buyers in particular (including their financial challenges or leadership transitions, and their stated strategic direction), it was unlikely that any prospective strategic buyers would be interested in pursuing a transaction with Kindred. Members of the Transaction Committee also noted that there were risks particular to inviting potential strategic buyers, particularly those in the post-acute industry, to participate in the process at an early stage, especially if such strategic parties were unlikely to proceed with a transaction. These included the risk that rumors of such participation may discourage potential private equity buyers from committing the resources necessary to investigate a potential transaction, thereby unduly narrowing the pool of prospective bidders at an early stage in a manner that would hamper the competitive nature of the process, and the risk of providing confidential due diligence information to a potential strategic buyer that did not ultimately pursue a transaction. Members of the Transaction Committee also considered that, given their greater familiarity with business and regulatory issues generally affecting the industries in which Kindred operates, it was likely that potential strategic buyers would be capable of completing an initial due diligence investigation of Kindred more quickly than private equity buyers.

The Transaction Committee, its advisors and senior management also discussed further risks associated with leaks, particularly if a broad number of buyers were approached to gauge their interest in a potential transaction. Following discussion, taking into account input from senior management and Kindred’s advisors, it was the consensus of the Transaction Committee that senior management and the financial advisors initially should focus on private equity bidders rather than strategic bidders at this stage in the process, with the expectation that, if the process sufficiently progressed, Kindred would consider inviting potential strategic bidders to participate. The Transaction Committee further determined and noted that it would be advisable for Kindred to pursue a process with three to five actively engaged prospective bidders, so as to create meaningful competitive tension while limiting distractions to, and the draining of resources from, Kindred’s senior management. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities provided the Transaction Committee with an illustrative timeline for a potential sale process and an illustrative timeline for the SNF divestiture.

Mr. Breier also updated the Transaction Committee on other strategic alternatives that senior management was considering, including potential strategic combinations or asset sales to delever Kindred. The Transaction Committee requested that senior management consider the effect of Kindred’s financing arrangements and potential breakage costs that may result from such delevering transactions based on different timing scenarios. Mr. Breier noted that senior management would be including those considerations in its analyses for the Board, as well as, among other variables, the tax effects associated with such transactions. The Transaction Committee directed senior management and representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to hold preliminary exploratory discussions with seven private equity firms, including Financial Party A, Financial Party B, Financial Party C, Financial Party D and three other firms (“Financial Party G”, “Financial Party H” and “Financial Party I”, respectively) in order to establish an initial bidding group of optimal size.

42

Following the Transaction Committee meeting, as directed by the Transaction Committee, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors initiated contact with Financial Party A, Financial Party B, Financial Party C, Financial Party D, Financial Party G, Financial Party H and Financial Party I to solicit their interest in a potential transaction involving Kindred.

Between December 20, 2016 and January 3, 2017, Kindred and each of Financial Party C, Financial Party D, Financial Party G and Financial Party H entered into confidentiality agreements, which included customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s prior approval. Each of the confidentiality agreements also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent. Financial Party I declined to enter into a confidentiality agreement with Kindred or otherwise participate further in the process.

On January 3, 2017, Financial Party B entered into an addendum to its confidentiality agreement with Kindred to provide that a private equity firm (“Financial Party J”) would be considered a representative of Financial Party B under Financial Party B’s confidentiality agreement.

On January 9, 2017, during the annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco, California, at the request of Humana, Mr. Breier and other representatives of Kindred met with representatives of Humana, including Bruce Broussard, Chief Executive Officer, Brian Kane, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, and Chris Hunter, Senior Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer to discuss Kindred’s home health and other service offerings and their potential benefit to Humana.

On January 13, 2017, Kindred provided Financial Party A, the Financial Party B consortium, Financial Party C, Financial Party D, Financial Party G and Financial Party H with access to a virtual data room containing selected financial and business information regarding Kindred.

On January 18, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Financial Party D’s outside legal counsel to discuss possible transaction structuring alternatives.

On January 20, 2017, Mr. Breier provided an update to the Transaction Committee on developments since representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors had contacted the private equity firms as directed by the Transaction Committee. Mr. Breier noted that six potential bidders (with the Financial Party B consortium constituting a single bidder) were currently conducting diligence based on initial materials posted in the virtual data room, and senior management would be holding meetings with the potential bidders in the upcoming weeks. Mr. Breier also provided the Transaction Committee with a draft of the management presentation to be provided to the bidders during such meetings, which presentation included a version of Kindred’s financial model that had been revised since having been reviewed with the Board at the December 1 meeting, and an illustrative development model.

Between January 24, 2017 and January 31, 2017, Kindred’s senior management conducted in-person management presentations with each of Financial Party A, the Financial Party B consortium, Financial Party C, Financial Party D, Financial Party G and Financial Party H. The management presentations included a discussion of Kindred’s long-term strategy, business segments and financial performance.

On January 26, 2017, a private equity firm (“Financial Party K”) submitted an unsolicited, non-binding written proposal (subject to the completion of due diligence) for the acquisition of Kindred for $16.00 per share in cash, which represented a 119% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on January 25, 2017. Financial Party K’s proposal contemplated that Kindred would be separated into two businesses, “Post-Acute Co” (consisting of Kindred’s LTAC, IRF and potentially SNF businesses) and “Homecare Co” (consisting of Kindred’s home health, hospice and community care businesses). Homecare Co would be merged into a health care services company, which we refer to as Strategic Party 1. Financial Party K held an equity interest in

43

Strategic Party 1 and confirmed that the proposal was supported by the board of Strategic Party 1. Financial Party K’s proposal estimated $100 million of synergies in a combination of HomecareCo with Strategic Party 1.

On January 31, 2017, following approval of the Transaction Committee, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with Financial Party K. This confidentiality agreement included customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision (which permitted Financial Party K to submit confidential proposals to the Board in the event Kindred entered into a definitive agreement to consummate, or publicly announced its plans to enter into, a change of control or similar strategic transaction) and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred’s management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On January 31, 2017, a representative of Humana contacted Mr. Breier requesting him to call Mr. Broussard of Humana. Mr. Breier contacted Mr. Broussard on February 1, 2017, during which call Mr. Broussard indicated an interest in discussing potential collaborations involving Kindred and Humana. During this call, Mr. Breier indicated that Kindred was in the process of exploring strategic alternatives, and Mr. Broussard expressed Humana’s interest in a potential transaction involving Kindred. Mr. Breier subsequently informed Ms. Yale of Humana’s interest, and Ms. Yale determined to seek the Transaction Committee’s approval to include Humana in the process.

On February 2, 2017, senior management conducted an in-person management presentation with representatives from Financial Party K.

On February 6, 2017, at the direction of the Transaction Committee, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors sent first round process letters to all of the prospective private equity bidders (other than Financial Party I, which had declined to participate in the process) requesting that each party submit a preliminary, non-binding written proposal by February 14, 2017 for the acquisition of Kindred, addressing, among other things, price and form of consideration, valuation, sources and uses of capital, focus areas for due diligence and required approvals.

On February 9, 2017, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss updates since the December 16 Transaction Committee meeting and Mr. Breier’s January 20 update. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reported that they had contacted all of the private equity firms the Transaction Committee had instructed them to contact, and, with the exception of Financial Party I, each private equity firm had expressed interest in a potential transaction and executed a confidentiality agreement. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed the feedback received from, and further discussions held with, the prospective private equity bidders following the management presentations. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also reviewed the unsolicited proposal from Financial Party K and discussed Humana’s inbound indication of interest. Following this review, members of the Transaction Committee discussed if and when to invite other potential strategic buyers to participate in the process and the competitive sensitivities and increased risk of potential leaks in doing so. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors identified a potential strategic buyer (“Strategic Party 2”) that might consider engaging in a potential transaction with Kindred. The Transaction Committee, with input from senior management and representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors, discussed the relative merits of reaching out to Strategic Party 2 at that time versus waiting until after the preliminary non-binding proposals were received from the then-current bidders. The Transaction Committee concluded that representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities should contact Strategic Party 2 and should refrain from contacting additional potential bidders (other than Humana) at this time.

Also on February 9, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with Humana, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision (which permitted Humana to submit confidential proposals to the Board in the event that Kindred entered into a definitive agreement to consummate,

44

or publicly announced its plans to enter into, a change of control or similar strategic transaction) and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On February 10, 2017, at the direction of the Transaction Committee, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors initiated contact with Strategic Party 2 to solicit Strategic Party 2’s interest in a potential transaction involving Kindred.

Also on February 10, 2017, a representative from Financial Party K contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to indicate that Financial Party K had decided to not continue exploring a potential transaction with Kindred. Financial Party K indicated to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors that the tax effects of the proposed structure, debt breakage costs, Kindred’s master lease with Ventas and its existing leverage contributed to Financial Party K’s unwillingness to move forward.

Also on February 10, 2017, a representative from Financial Party B contacted Kindred’s financial advisors to indicate that it had decided to not continue exploring a potential transaction involving Kindred, and cited the weaker than expected performance of Kindred’s LTAC business under the new LTAC reimbursement criteria and concerns regarding debt breakage costs as reasons for withdrawing. Financial Party E and Financial Party F continued as co-bidders in the process, despite Financial Party B’s withdrawal from the process.

On February 13, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Broussard met in Louisville, Kentucky, during which they discussed Kindred’s hospital division and its home health and hospice operations.

On February 14, 2017, Financial Party C, the Financial Party E and Financial Party F partnership and Financial Party H each submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a preliminary, non-binding written proposal for a potential acquisition of Kindred, subject to various conditions, including the completion of diligence. The Financial Party E and Financial Party F partnership submitted a proposal reflecting an acquisition of Kindred at a valuation range of $10.00 to $11.00 per share in cash, which represented a 49% to 64% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on February 13, 2017. Financial Party C submitted a proposal to acquire Kindred for $11.00 per share in cash. Financial Party H submitted a proposal reflecting an acquisition of Kindred at a valuation range of $10.00 to $11.00 per share in cash. Financial Party D submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a preliminary, non-binding proposal for a structured minority investment in Kindred in the form of a convertible preferred instrument that would include a cash coupon with a pay-in-kind election. Financial Party D’s proposal noted that such an instrument would include “customary economic and governance provisions,” including conversion at a premium to Kindred’s stock price and board representation, but did not further specify the proposed terms of such investment or provide additional details. A representative from Financial Party G contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to indicate that Financial Party G had declined to submit a proposal and decided to not continue its exploration of a potential transaction with Kindred.

Also on February 14, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Financial Party D’s outside legal counsel to further discuss transaction structuring alternatives.

On February 15, 2017, Financial Party A submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors an oral proposal to combine Kindred with one of its portfolio companies in the healthcare services industry, which we refer to as Strategic Party 3, in an all-stock transaction whereby Kindred would effectively acquire Strategic Party 3 and Financial Party A would become a minority stockholder in Kindred. Financial Party A did not provide an indicative valuation or any further details regarding its proposal.

Also on February 15, 2017, Strategic Party 1 submitted a preliminary, non-binding proposal for a “Reverse Morris Trust” transaction involving Kindred’s home health, hospice and community care businesses, collectively the “Kindred at Home” business. Strategic Party 1’s proposal contemplated a transaction in which Kindred at

45

Home would be spun off to Kindred’s stockholders and merged with Strategic Party 1 (“CombinedCo”), and the remaining Kindred entity (“RemainCo”) would receive a $2.1 billion cash payment. While Strategic Party 1’s proposal asserted that the combination of cash and stock would result in value to Kindred stockholders of $28 to $30 per share, this was dependent on both of the resulting companies trading at certain assumed multiples post-closing.

On February 16 and 17, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. Representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb joined the portions of the meeting relating to the SNF divestiture and the potential sale of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed the timeline of events to date, including the potential bidders that the Transaction Committee, in consultation with representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors, had determined to approach at this stage in the process. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed the management presentations that were shared with the potential bidders and the responses thereto. They then reviewed Humana’s inbound indication of interest and Financial Party K’s unsolicited proposal, which had been subsequently withdrawn. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that, as directed by the Transaction Committee, they had reached out to Strategic Party 2 but that Strategic Party 2 had not yet responded to indicate any interest in a potential transaction with Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided an overview of the non-binding proposals received to date, each of which (other than the proposal by Financial Party D) contemplated an acquisition of all of Kindred’s outstanding equity. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then discussed Financial Party D’s proposal for an equity investment of an unspecified amount. Following this discussion, the Board determined to not pursue an equity investment at that time given that, in the Board’s view, it would be highly dilutive to Kindred’s existing stockholders. Discussion then ensued with respect to Financial Party A’s proposal, which contemplated a merger of Kindred with Strategic Party 3 and the deleveraging of the combined company through an equity investment by Financial Party A. Following this discussion, the Board determined to not pursue such a transaction at that time, since Strategic Party 3 did not appear to be a strategic fit with Kindred, but instructed senior management to learn more about Strategic Party 3.

Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then provided an overview of Strategic Party 1’s February 15 Reverse Morris Trust proposal, and discussed with the Board that such proposal appeared to be primarily driven by Strategic Party 1’s view of the substantial amount of estimated synergies and the potential multiple expansion associated with the separation of the combined home health company from RemainCo. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed their preliminary financial analyses of Strategic Party 1’s proposal, including noting that their preliminary financial analyses indicated values substantially below the $28.00 to $30.00 per share estimated valuation range resulting from the potential transaction that was asserted by Strategic Party 1 in its February 15 proposal. Representatives of senior management noted that the February 15 proposal would result in a likely unsustainable degree of leverage at RemainCo and that a substantial additional equity investment would likely be required in order to make the proposal viable, and further noted the potential effects of these factors on the feasibility of effectuating such a transaction.

Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that, overall, a substantial amount of diligence and structuring work would need to be done by each of the potential bidders in order for them to assess their ability to move forward. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then reviewed their preliminary financial analyses of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors discussed next steps and potential process alternatives, including, among others, a cash divesture of Kindred’s hospice, community care or RehabCare businesses and a potential merger of equals with an operator of senior living communities. After discussion, the Board directed Kindred’s financial advisors to convey to Strategic Party 1 that Strategic Party 1 should submit a proposal for a transaction that involved the acquisition of Kindred in its entirety, similar to the transaction initially submitted by Financial Party K.

Following the February 16 and 17 Board meeting, each of Financial Party C, Financial Party D, the Financial Party E and Financial Party F partnership, Financial Party H and their respective advisors continued their due diligence review.

46

On February 17, 2017, at the direction of the Board, representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities conveyed to Strategic Party 1 that Strategic Party 1 should submit a proposal for a transaction that involved the acquisition of Kindred in its entirety, similar to the transaction initially submitted by Financial Party K.

On February 21, 2017, Financial Party C and Financial Party E, citing their respective need for an equity partner in order to be able to pursue a potential transaction, requested permission to form a partnership to explore an acquisition of Kindred. In order to induce Financial Party C and Financial Party E to remain in the process, Kindred granted this request and executed an addendum to Kindred’s confidentiality agreement with each of Financial Party C and Financial Party E in order to permit them to act as co-investors.

Also on February 21, 2017, at the direction of the Board, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided Humana with a process letter and requested a preliminary proposal by the week of February 27, 2017.

On February 22, 2017, a representative from Strategic Party 2 contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to indicate Strategic Party 2 was not interested in evaluating a potential transaction with Kindred.

Also on February 22, 2017, at the direction of the Board, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors informed Financial Party D that Kindred was focused on a comprehensive solution rather than a structured minority investment. Following this conversation, a representative from Financial Party D contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to indicate that Financial Party D was only interested in a structured minority investment and had decided to not continue exploring a potential transaction involving the acquisition of Kindred.

On February 24, 2017, Kindred senior management held an in-person management presentation with representatives of Humana.

On February 27, 2017, Kindred released its 2016 year-end results and provided 2017 and 2018 earnings guidance. Kindred also announced that it would cease paying a cash dividend and use the available cash flow to repay debt and to invest in growth initiatives.

Also on February 27, 2017, Financial Party F’s legal advisor informed Cleary Gottlieb that Financial Party F had decided to not continue exploring a potential transaction with Kindred.

On March 1, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with Strategic Party 1, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision (which permitted Strategic Party 1 to submit confidential proposals to the Board in the event that Kindred entered into a definitive agreement to consummate, or publicly announced its plans to enter into, a change of control or similar strategic transaction) and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On March 2, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Broussard met in New York, New York. At this meeting, they discussed, among other things, the form of consideration Humana could provide to Kindred stockholders in connection with a potential acquisition of Kindred.

On March 7, 2017, Humana submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a preliminary, non-binding proposal (subject to, among other things, due diligence, including additional time with management to establish a better understanding of Kindred’s business, completion of the SNF divestiture resulting in net proceeds to Kindred of $130 million, consent from Ventas to the transaction prior to Humana’s execution of any definitive documents and approval from Humana’s Board and senior management team) reflecting an acquisition of Kindred at a valuation range of $11.00 to $13.00 per share in cash, which represented a 17% to 38% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on March 6, 2017.

47

On March 14, 2017, Strategic Party 1 submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a revised indicative, non-binding proposal, which contained two alternative potential transactions: (i) an acquisition of Kindred in its entirety for an estimated value of $13.00 per share with the consideration in the form of Strategic Party 1 stock, which Strategic Party 1’s financial advisors orally communicated to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors would be conditioned upon Strategic Party 1 selling, or otherwise identifying an efficient way to separate, RemainCo from Kindred at Home and (ii) a Reverse Morris Trust transaction involving the Kindred at Home business being spun off from Kindred and merged with Strategic Party 1. Pursuant to Strategic Party 1’s first option in the revised proposal, Financial Party K would invest up to $300 million in cash to delever the new combined company, and the new combined company would be owned 34% by Kindred’s existing stockholders, 48% by Strategic Party 1’s existing stockholders and 18% by Financial Party K. The consideration in the second option in the revised proposal would consist of equity in the new combined company and a cash dividend to RemainCo. Strategic Party 1 asserted that the Reverse Morris Trust proposal would provide value of approximately $19.50 per share of Kindred common stock, which was $10 lower than the value included in Strategic Party 1’s February 15 proposal, but still substantially higher than the values indicated by the preliminary financial analyses of Kindred’s financial advisors. The proposal indicated that under either alternative in the revised proposal, Financial Party K would provide an equity investment in the new combined company in support of the transaction. Strategic Party 1’s proposal contained a request for four weeks of exclusivity.

On March 15, 2017, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. At this meeting, the Transaction Committee, senior management and representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors discussed the interaction between the SNF divestiture and the potential sale of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reported that all participants in the process had conveyed a clear preference for Kindred to have fully divested of its skilled nursing facilities prior to the closing of the sale of Kindred, with some bidders indicating that the completion of the SNF divestiture would be a condition to the closing of the sale of Kindred.

Representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors discussed the two alternative proposals in Strategic Party 1’s March 14 proposal, noting that they disagreed with some of the data and assumptions used in Strategic Party 1’s valuation methodology. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reported that, according to indications from Strategic Party 1, it had estimated that the potential transaction would generate potentially $100 million of run-rate synergies, and Mr. Breier indicated that he believed that, subject to further diligence, this was a reasonable assumption. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed their preliminary financial analyses of Strategic Party 1’s two alternative proposed transactions, noting that they lacked sufficient details to fully evaluate the proposed Reverse Morris Trust transaction and that their preliminary financial analyses indicated values substantially below the $19.50 per share asserted by Strategic Party 1 in its Reverse Morris Trust proposal. The Transaction Committee discussed the viability of the publicly traded RemainCo that would result from the Reverse Morris Trust transaction, the difficulties in valuing such portion of the consideration, and concerns with the feasibility of effectuating the Reverse Morris Trust transaction given the resulting leverage of RemainCo. Following discussion, the Transaction Committee declined to grant Strategic Party 1’s exclusivity request in light of where Kindred was in the process with Humana and the other bidders.

Discussion ensued as to the potential value to be realized by Kindred’s stockholders from potential strategic and cost synergy opportunities for Humana in connection with a transaction involving Kindred. The Transaction Committee instructed representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to provide any further information to Strategic Party 1 and Humana as would be necessary or helpful for them to evaluate potential synergies, and to explain how such synergies would translate into a higher price for Kindred’s stockholders. The Transaction Committee concluded that representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities should continue to attempt to create competitive tension (including continued engagement with Financial Party A, notwithstanding pending questions regarding the feasibility of Financial Party A’s proposal to merge Kindred with Strategic Party 3), expressed an openness to other bidders and structures that would maximize value for Kindred’s stockholders and

48

instructed representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to continue to explore ways to increase the purchase price being offered to Kindred stockholders.

On March 16, 2017, representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors met in person with representatives from Financial Party A in order for senior management to learn more about Strategic Party 3.

During the week of March 20, 2017, Kindred senior management held separate in-person or telephonic meetings with representatives of Financial Party C, Financial Party E and Financial Party H, and received and responded to written due diligence requests from Humana.

On March 23, 2017, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. At this meeting, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided the Board with an update on developments since the February 16 and 17 Board meeting. They noted that each of Financial Party C, Financial Party E, Financial Party H, Strategic Party 1 and Humana continued to conduct due diligence. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then reviewed their preliminary financial analyses of Strategic Party 1’s proposal. The Board, in consultation with representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities, discussed Strategic Party 1’s March 14 proposal, that the preliminary financial analyses of Kindred’s financial advisors indicated values for the Reverse Morris Trust transaction substantially lower than the valuation asserted by Strategic Party 1 in its March 14 proposal, and that senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors had been unable to obtain sufficient information from Strategic Party 1 that would support its assumptions underlying such valuation. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors conveyed the indication from representatives of Strategic Party 1 that Strategic Party 1 was unwilling to proceed with an exploration of the potential all-stock acquisition of Kindred unless Strategic Party 1 was granted exclusivity. Following further discussion, the Board determined that it would not grant Strategic Party 1 exclusivity.

On March 28, 2017, Kindred conducted management presentations with representatives of Humana. In addition, Mr. Breier had a call with Mr. Broussard, who conveyed Humana’s continued interest in a potential transaction involving Kindred.

On April 4, 2017, representatives of Strategic Party 1 sent representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a follow-up letter addressed to Ms. Yale, which restated Strategic Party 1’s assertion that the March 14 Reverse Morris Trust proposal would provide $19.50 per share in value to Kindred stockholders.

On April 12, 2017, Kindred senior management met in person with Financial Party C and Financial Party E to discuss due diligence matters, with a particular focus on the LTAC business. At the direction of the Board, representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities also met telephonically with representatives of Strategic Party 1’s financial advisors to discuss the proposed Reverse Morris Trust transaction.

On April 13, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Broussard met in Louisville, Kentucky, during which Mr. Broussard discussed Humana’s desire to partner with a private equity firm for the acquisition of Kindred. Mr. Broussard indicated that Humana no longer desired to purchase all of Kindred but was principally interested in the Kindred at Home business, and thus other parties would be required to purchase the remaining businesses if a sale of the whole Company were to be viable. Mr. Broussard conveyed his belief that a number of private equity firms would be interested in partnering with Humana and reiterated Humana’s desire to create a transaction with multiple parties to acquire Kindred in its entirety. Mr. Breier informed Mr. Broussard that Kindred would need a proposal from Humana with some details on a potential transaction structure with a private equity firm before Kindred would be willing to allow Humana to partner with a private equity firm. Mr. Breier subsequently received a presentation from Morgan Stanley, Humana’s financial advisor, with a high-level description of a potential structure whereby Humana would acquire the Kindred at Home business and own the remainder of Kindred in partnership with a private equity firm, which would hold a majority of the equity interest in the remainder of Kindred.

49

On April 17, 2017, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss developments through that date, including Humana’s recent request for permission to partner with a private equity firm. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that Financial Party C continued to express interest in a potential transaction, but had recently communicated a need for an additional equity partner to pursue a transaction of this size and requested Barclays’ and Guggenheim Securities’ assistance in identifying such an equity partner. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors informed the Transaction Committee that they were prepared to assist Financial Party C and noted that Financial Party C and Financial Party E had not yet solidified their partnership but were working to do so. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors informed the Transaction Committee that, as instructed by the Transaction Committee, they had conveyed to Financial Party C that the process was still very competitive and that Financial Party C needed to improve the price of its offer.

Representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors then discussed Strategic Party 1’s March 14 Reverse Morris Trust proposal. They noted that the proposal continued to reflect certain assumptions that were questionable or uncertain (including that the proposal had excluded certain debt breakage costs, had relied on share counts that were not fully-diluted, had assumed Kindred would receive substantially more than the actual expected proceeds from the SNF divestiture, and had not accounted for financing and other transaction fees). They also indicated concerns that, based on the amount of equity financing contemplated by Strategic Party 1’s proposal, the publicly traded RemainCo would have an overleveraged capital structure, which could significantly impact its valuation and the viability of the proposed transaction.

Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their preliminary financial analyses regarding Strategic Party 1’s March 14 Reverse Morris Trust proposal, including certain illustrative analyses designed to provide an indication of the implied equity values for Kindred stockholders of CombinedCo and RemainCo. These analyses reflected senior management’s estimates for debt breakage costs, SNF divestiture proceeds and financing and other transaction fees, and at the direction of senior management, were prepared both including and excluding a theoretical additional cash investment by Party K in CombinedCo, which was designed to reduce the leverage of RemainCo.

To calculate an illustrative enterprise value for CombinedCo, Kindred’s financial advisors applied an estimated 2017 EBITDA multiple of 12.0x to the projected 2017 EBITDA for CombinedCo based on Wall Street consensus projections for Strategic Party 1 and Kindred management’s projections for the Homecare Business and the synergies expected to result from the transaction. The illustrative enterprise value was adjusted for the projected net debt of CombinedCo, the book value of noncontrolling interests and the portion of CombinedCo that Kindred stockholders would not own. Based on this adjusted illustrative enterprise value, Kindred’s financial advisors derived an implied equity value per share of CombinedCo for Kindred stockholders of $11.42 (assuming no additional cash investment by Party K) and $3.82 (including the theoretical additional cash investment by Party K).

To calculate an illustrative enterprise value for RemainCo, Kindred’s financial advisors applied an estimated 2017 EBITDAR multiple of 7.5x to the projected 2017 EBITDAR for RemainCo based on Kindred management’s projections for RemainCo. The illustrative enterprise value was adjusted for RemainCo’s capitalized rent, the projected net debt of RemainCo and the book value of noncontrolling interests. Based on this adjusted illustrative enterprise value, Kindred’s financial advisors derived an implied equity value per share of RemainCo for Kindred stockholders of $0.00 (assuming no additional cash investment by Party K) and $5.32 (including the theoretical additional cash investment by Party K).

Kindred’s financial advisors then added the implied equity values per share of CombinedCo and RemainCo, which resulted in an implied total equity value per share of Kindred common stock of $11.42 (assuming no additional cash investment by Party K) and $9.14 (including the theoretical additional cash investment by Party K).

50

The Transaction Committee discussed these analyses, as well as the risks relating to the potential transaction, including that the two separate public companies would continue to face risks associated with the evolving healthcare regulatory environment and general operational and industry headwinds. The Transaction Committee also considered the risks that the assumed trading multiples of each of the companies may decline over time, given that companies in the homecare business were trading at almost double their historical trading levels and that RemainCo’s trading multiple may be challenged in a slower growth environment in light of its significant rent obligations. The Transaction Committee concluded, however, that it remained advantageous to continue discussions with Strategic Party 1 regarding a potential transaction, and instructed representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to do so.

The Transaction Committee and representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then discussed Financial Party A’s ongoing interest in merging Kindred with Strategic Party 3 in a stock-for-stock merger. Given Strategic Party 3’s low margin and high capital expense business model, among other factors, the Board was of the view, after consultation with Kindred’s financial advisors, that this transaction was less attractive to stockholders than a sale of the whole company and should be given a lower priority.

Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then reviewed the recent discussions with Humana regarding Humana’s request to reach out to four private equity firms (Financial Party B, Financial Party I, TPG and WCAS) regarding forming a potential partnership in order to facilitate a potential acquisition of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that Sharad Mansukani, M.D., a member of the Board, served as a Senior Advisor to TPG, and senior management indicated that a process would be followed in order to appropriately address any conflict that might arise from such affiliation in the context of the Board’s evaluation of a transaction involving TPG. Discussions ensued regarding the private equity firms with which Humana proposed to partner, the impact of permitting such a partnership in the process and the potential incremental value to Kindred stockholders. The Transaction Committee directed representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to inform Humana that they could contact three private equity firms (Financial Party B, TPG and WCAS) to discuss forming a partnership to explore a potential acquisition of Kindred.

Also on April 17, 2017, a representative of Financial Party H contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors and indicated Financial Party H was no longer interested in continuing its exploration of a potential transaction with Kindred at such time.

On April 18, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Strategic Party 1’s outside legal advisor to discuss the proposed Reverse Morris Trust transaction.

On April 19, 2017, the media outlet Mergermarket reported that Kindred was engaged in a potential sale process. On April 18, 2017, the closing price for Kindred common stock on the NYSE had been $7.80 per share. On April 20, 2017, the next day following publication of the article, Kindred’s closing stock price was $8.95 per share, which was 14.7% higher than the closing stock price on April 18.

On April 20, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with WCAS, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On April 21, 2017, Kindred and Humana entered into an addendum to Humana’s confidentiality agreement, permitting Humana to have discussions and share confidential information with each of WCAS, TPG and Financial Party B in order to evaluate a potential joint proposal to acquire Kindred. Financial Party B subsequently declined to consider a potential partnership with Humana.

On April 23, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with TPG, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision (which permitted TPG to submit confidential

51

proposals to the Board in the event that Kindred would enter into a definitive agreement to consummate or publicly announce its plans to enter into, a change of control or similar transaction) and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent. In addition, the confidentiality agreement provided notice to TPG that Kindred had engaged Cleary Gottlieb in connection with a potential transaction (like other confidentiality agreements Kindred entered into during this process) and included a waiver by TPG for such representation of Kindred because Cleary Gottlieb currently represented TPG and its affiliates in matters unrelated to TPG’s exploration of a potential transaction involving Kindred. Kindred had previously provided Cleary Gottlieb with a waiver with respect to its ongoing representation of bidders that were clients in matters that were not substantially related to matters in which Cleary Gottlieb was representing or had represented Kindred.

Throughout March and April 2017, Strategic Party 1, Financial Party C, Financial Party E and Humana continued to conduct due diligence on Kindred, including via access to an electronic data room.

On the evening of May 2, 2017, Messrs. Broussard and Breier met for dinner in Louisville, Kentucky. During dinner, Messrs. Broussard and Breier discussed generally a potential transaction between Kindred and Humana, as well as the respective businesses of Kindred and Humana.

On May 3, 2017, Kindred announced its first quarter 2017 earnings results. Following the announcement, Kindred’s closing share price was $10.60, which reflected a 6.5% increase to Kindred’s closing share price on May 2, 2017.

On May 5, 2017, Strategic Party 1 provided representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors with a letter indicating Strategic Party 1 was formally withdrawing from exploring a potential transaction with Kindred.

On May 23, 2017, Humana submitted an updated non-binding proposal for an acquisition of Kindred at a valuation range of $11.00 to $13.00 per share in cash, which represented a 7% to 26% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on May 22, 2017. Humana’s updated proposal contemplated that Humana would continue to work with each of TPG and WCAS to form a consortium. The proposal referenced two potential alternative transaction structures that Humana was evaluating: (1) Humana and a private equity firm acquiring Kindred as a whole and an immediate separation of the Kindred at Home business from Kindred’s remaining businesses and (2) Humana and a private equity firm acquiring Kindred as a whole and, at a later date, ultimately spinning out the Kindred at Home business. Humana requested a meeting with Ventas in the near term and proposed eight weeks to complete due diligence and negotiate transaction documents.

On May 24 and 25, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. Representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb joined a portion of the meeting to discuss updates with respect to the SNF divestiture and the potential transaction for the sale of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed Humana’s May 23 proposal and noted that Humana was actively engaging with TPG and WCAS regarding a potential consortium to facilitate an acquisition of Kindred. During this discussion, Dr. Mansukani was asked to leave the meeting room. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that Humana continued to invest substantial time and money in evaluating a potential transaction involving Kindred and had expressed its commitment to moving forward with the proposed timeline, provided Humana was given an opportunity to meet with Ventas to discuss the implications of the potential transaction under Kindred’s master leases with Ventas. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their preliminary financial analyses regarding Humana’s proposal. The Board then discussed whether to engage with Ventas and concluded that further clarity on the proposed transaction structure would be necessary prior to approaching Ventas.

Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then provided an update on discussions with Financial Party C, noting Financial Party C had reported it was evaluating a potential transaction structure that might involve

52

separating Kindred into three businesses. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted Financial Party C had reported that a significant gating item for Financial Party C was its review of the tax implications of the transaction, which review would be time consuming and require substantial additional work on the part of Kindred. Financial Party C had also reported that it still needed an additional equity partner, but preferred to be close to a final transaction structure before engaging with other potential private equity partners. Mr. Breier pointed out that it was unclear whether Financial Party C and Financial Party E were still jointly evaluating a potential acquisition of Kindred. The Board then discussed tactics around how and when to reach out to Ventas. Further discussion ensued on transaction structures and whether the sale of individual business segments by Kindred would make sense. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred. Representatives of senior management discussed investors’ and analysts’ reactions to Kindred’s first quarter earnings results and current analysts’ price estimates and noted that, while some of the uptick in stock price might be a result of the first quarter results, the current stock price also might include a premium based on takeover speculation. Representatives of senior management noted that such takeover speculation may be further evidenced by trading activity in Kindred’s publicly traded senior notes —two tranches of which were at that time priced above par — since the Mergermarket article was published on April 19, 2017. Following these discussions, the Board directed management and representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to continue to engage with each of Humana and Financial Party C, including to inform Humana that Kindred would agree to discussions with Ventas once Humana solidified its transaction structure, and to ask Financial Party C to specify the tax information it required from Kindred in order to move forward.

On June 30, 2017, Kindred announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement for the SNF divestiture with BM Eagle Holdings, LLC, a joint venture led by affiliates of BlueMountain Capital Management, LLC.

On July 1, 2017, a representative of Financial Party C informed representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors that Financial Party C had decided to suspend further exploration of a potential transaction with Kindred at such time, based on market rumors that Humana was engaged in the process and Financial Party C’s concern that it could not be competitive on price with Humana.

On July 7, 2017, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors received a call from Morgan Stanley with updates on Humana’s proposed transaction structure for the acquisition of Kindred. The revised structure contemplated that Kindred would be separated into a HospitalCo (comprised of the LTAC and IRF businesses) and a HomecareCo (comprised of the Kindred at Home business). HospitalCo would be owned 100% by the private equity firms, and HomecareCo would be owned 60% and 40% by the private equity firms and Humana, respectively, with Humana having the right to acquire the private equity partners’ interest in HomecareCo over time through a put/call arrangement. Morgan Stanley noted that Humana, TPG and WCAS had not arrived at a formal agreement, but were quite close with structural details to be worked out. There would be a collaboration agreement between the private equity firms and Humana and each of the separated companies would be financed independently. Morgan Stanley again expressed the Consortium’s desire to meet with Ventas regarding a potential transaction.

On July 9, 2017, a representative from Financial Party E contacted Mr. Breier to request permission, given Financial Party E’s continuing need for an equity partner in order to pursue a transaction of the size of an acquisition of Kindred, for Financial Party E to engage in discussions with an additional private equity firm (“Financial Party L”) to act as a co-investor in the potential acquisition of Kindred and for Financial Party E to contact a major bank as a potential debt financing source on a non-exclusive basis. Such permission was subsequently granted, and Kindred and Financial Party E executed an addendum to Financial Party E’s confidentiality agreement on July 18, 2017.

On July 10, 2017, Mr. Breier had an in-person meeting with Debra Cafaro, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Ventas, in Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Breier informed Ms. Cafaro that Kindred was in discussions regarding potential take-private transactions, including a potential take-private transaction by Humana, in partnership with a private equity firm, and described Humana’s proposed transaction structure.

53

During the week of July 17, 2017, Kindred senior management conducted in-person management presentations with TPG and WCAS.

On July 18, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Broussard met in person, and Mr. Breier summarized his meeting with Ms. Cafaro and discussed next steps. Mr. Breier encouraged Mr. Broussard to proceed expeditiously in finalizing the structure and terms of Humana’s consortium with the private equity firms.

Also on July 18, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with Financial Party L. This confidentiality agreement included customary confidentiality provisions, an 18-month standstill provision (which permitted Financial Party L to submit confidential proposals to the Board in the event that Kindred entered into a definitive agreement to consummate, or publicly announced its plans to enter into, a change of control or similar strategic transaction), prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval and permitted Financial Party E to act as a co-investor with Financial Party L. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On July 20, 2017, Financial Party E and Financial Party L requested, and were granted, permission to have Financial Party J join their partnership to facilitate a potential acquisition of Kindred. Also, Financial Party F requested and was granted permission to re-enter the process and to join Financial Party E, Financial Party J and Financial Party L (the “Financial Party E consortium”) as co-bidders in connection with a potential transaction.

Also on July 20, 2017, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to discuss developments through that date. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided an update on Humana’s proposed transaction structure for the acquisition of Kindred, which contemplated that Kindred would be separated into a HospitalCo (comprised of the Hospital Business) and a HomecareCo (comprised of the Homecare Business). HospitalCo would be owned 100% by the private equity firms, and HomecareCo would be owned 60% and 40% by the private equity firms and Humana, respectively, with Humana having the right to acquire the private equity partners’ interest in HomecareCo over time through a put/call arrangement. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also reported to the Transaction Committee on the ongoing due diligence being conducted by Humana, TPG and WCAS, including the management presentations with TPG and WCAS held earlier in the week. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also reported that representatives of Financial Party C had notified representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors that Financial Party C had decided to suspend any further exploration of a potential acquisition of Kindred. Discussion then followed over Financial Party C’s reported reasons for withdrawing from the process, including its concern that it could not be competitive with Humana on price. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors then reported on the formation of the Financial Party E consortium and provided an update on the status of discussions with the Financial Party E consortium. Mr. Breier then provided the Transaction Committee with an update on his meeting with Ms. Cafaro on July 10, 2017.

On July 25, 2017, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a proposed rule (the “HHGM Proposal”) proposing to change reimbursement rates for home health reimbursement payments on or after January 1, 2019 by moving from a unit of payment based on 60-day episodes of care to 30-day episodes of care. According to multiple publications, the HHGM Proposal was estimated to result in a $950 million Medicare payment cut for home health providers in 2019. In comments submitted to CMS in connection with the HHGM Proposal, the National Association for Home Care & Hospice estimated that the HHGM Proposal would result in a greater than 15% effective payment rate cut, which substantially exceeded the estimate offered by CMS. Following announcement of the HHGM Proposal, the stock price for home health companies experienced a downturn, with Kindred’s closing stock price going from $11.35 on July 24, 2017 to a closing price of $9.55 on July 26, 2017. Kindred’s stock price continued to trade down following announcement of the HHGM Proposal, eventually reaching $5.60 on September 20, 2017.

On July 27, 2017, Kindred entered into a confidentiality agreement with Financial Party J, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and a two year standstill provision and prohibited contact with potential

54

debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. This confidentiality agreement also permitted Financial Party E, Financial Party F, Financial Party J and Financial Party L to act as co-investors. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent. Also on July 27, Kindred and Financial Party F entered into an addendum to Financial Party F’s confidentiality agreement to permit the same.

On July 28, 2017, Kindred senior management met telephonically with the Financial Party E consortium and a major bank to conduct a management presentation.

On August 1, 2017, the Financial Party E consortium submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors (i) a non-binding proposal reflecting an acquisition of Kindred at a valuation range of $10.00 to $10.50 per share in cash, subject to certain conditions, including completion of diligence, which represented a 12% to 17% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on July 31, 2017 and (ii) a “highly confident” letter from a major bank providing for a potential debt financing structure. The Financial Party E consortium proposal included a request for exclusivity until September 15, 2017.

Also on August 1, 2017, Humana submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a revised non-binding proposal to acquire Kindred in partnership with TPG at a valuation range of $11.00 to $12.00 per share in cash, subject to satisfaction of certain conditions including completion of diligence and a meeting with Ventas, which represented a 23% to 34% premium over Kindred’s closing stock price on July 31, 2017. The proposal noted that Humana and TPG were aligned in principal on the transaction framework, which contemplated that Kindred would be separated into two independent businesses at closing with HomecareCo owned 60% and 40% by TPG and Humana, respectively, and HospitalCo owned 100% by TPG. TPG also submitted a letter describing its support for the transaction as set forth in the Humana proposal, subject to completion of due diligence in certain focus areas (including its assessment of Kindred’s LTAC reimbursement criteria mitigation efforts to date) and satisfaction of certain other conditions.

On August 2, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to discuss the recent proposals received from each of the Humana and TPG partnership and the Financial Party E consortium and Kindred’s strategic alternatives generally. The Board, along with representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities, discussed the context for Kindred’s decision to explore a potential transaction and certain impediments faced by Kindred as a standalone public company, including the impact of the regulatory environment across its LTAC, home health and other businesses, Kindred’s stock performance and leverage and the limits on its available capital for growth. The Board and representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors discussed that (i) the shares of diversified healthcare companies often trade at a discount relative to the sum of the intrinsic values of such companies’ respective business lines and (ii) the sum of the intrinsic values of Kindred’s business lines in its entirety was not necessarily indicative of the value that would be obtained in a series of divestiture, spin-off or other business separation transactions because such sum of intrinsic values would not reflect all potentially significant friction costs that would be associated with separating Kindred’s business lines, including dis-synergies, potential tax leakage and debt breakage costs. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred based on Kindred management’s financial projections and, at the direction of Kindred management, sensitivity scenarios assuming Kindred achieved 95% or 90%, respectively, of the revenue and EBITDAR projections included in management’s financial projections. Over the past two years, Kindred had achieved approximately 96% of its budget.

Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities then reviewed the recent proposals from the Humana and TPG partnership and the Financial Party E consortium and provided an update on the interactions with these bidders to date. They also reported that Financial Party C had decided to suspend any further exploration of a potential acquisition of Kindred. At the request of the Board, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also reviewed their preliminary financial analyses of potential alternative transactions to a sale of Kindred, including a theoretical joint venture with Humana with respect to the Kindred at Home business, a number of other alternatives to extract value from the Kindred at Home business, and deleveraging alternatives

55

as a standalone public company. The Board and representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors also discussed senior management’s estimates of the potential debt breakage costs, dis-synergies and tax leakage associated with these transactions. Following discussion of these analyses, the Board determined that no such alternative transaction presented an opportunity to achieve value for Kindred’s stockholders that was likely to be more attractive than the ongoing bidding process, but instructed senior management and representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to continue reviewing these and other potential alternatives and to report further to the Board at a later date. The Board directed senior management and representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to continue engaging with the Humana and TPG partnership and the Financial Party E consortium.

During the August 2 Board meeting, Dr. Mansukani and the Board determined that, because Dr. Mansukani serves as a Senior Advisor to TPG, he would thereafter recuse himself from Board deliberations regarding a potential transaction with the Consortium and would not receive any related materials distributed to the Board.

On August 3, 2017, Kindred announced its second quarter 2017 earnings results, withdrew its prior 2017 earnings guidance, and revised its 2018 earnings guidance.

On August 8, 2017, with the Board’s permission, WCAS joined the Humana and TPG partnership, forming the Consortium. In permitting WCAS to join the Consortium the Board considered, among other factors, the complexity of the potential transaction with the Consortium, WCAS’ prior experience as an investor in LTAC assets, and the desire of TPG and WCAS to work together as equity partners.

On August 15, 2017, a private equity firm (“Financial Party M”) joined the Financial Party E consortium and entered into a confidentiality agreement with Kindred, which contained customary confidentiality provisions and an 18-month standstill provision and prohibited contact with potential debt and equity financing sources without Kindred’s approval. The confidentiality agreement also prohibited any discussions with Kindred’s management regarding the terms of their post-transaction employment or equity participation without Kindred’s consent.

On August 30, 2017, TPG and Kindred entered into an addendum to TPG’s confidentiality agreement, adding the Public Sector Pension Investment Board (“PSPIB”) and the Teacher Retirement System of Texas as representatives of TPG, as a result of TPG advising Kindred that it was anticipated that PSPIB and the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, or their affiliates, would join the transaction as co-investors.

On September 7, 2017, Messrs. Broussard and Breier met for breakfast in Louisville, Kentucky. During breakfast, Messrs. Broussard and Breier further discussed generally a potential transaction between Kindred and Humana.

On September 13, 2017, Kindred entered into a clean team agreement with each of TPG and WCAS, pursuant to which Kindred subsequently provided to select personnel of, and advisors to, TPG and WCAS certain information pertaining to Kindred’s third party payor agreements. The clean team agreements prohibited TPG and WCAS from sharing this diligence information, and related summary reports, with Humana.

On September 14, 2017, a representative of the Financial Party E consortium contacted representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to inform them that the Financial Party E consortium had decided to not continue exploring a potential transaction with Kindred, citing the need for a strategic partner.

In September and October 2017, in connection with the review of Kindred’s insurance programs as a result of the SNF divestiture, senior management executed a restructuring of certain funding mechanisms and other elements of its workers’ compensation and medical malpractice insurance programs. The insurance restructuring primarily involved replacing cash collateral deposits with letters of credit and releasing other cash deposits to Kindred.

56

On October 3, 2017, the Consortium submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors an oral non-binding proposal to acquire Kindred for $8.00 per share in cash, representing a 13% premium to the closing price of Kindred’s common stock on October 2, 2017. Later on October 3^rd, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss updates since the August 2 Board meeting, including the Consortium proposal and Kindred’s proposed insurance restructuring. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed the Consortium’s oral proposal, noting that it was lower than Humana’s August 1 proposal. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors conveyed the reasons communicated by the Consortium for its reduced proposal, which primarily included Kindred’s revised lower financial forecasts for 2017 and 2018 (including adjustments to estimated proceeds from the SNF divestiture and other operational developments), a shortfall in net cash from the Consortium’s initial financial model which would require additional acquisition funding, and slower than expected mitigation of phase one LTAC reimbursement criteria, potential concerns regarding the effect of phase two of LTAC reimbursement criteria, the HHGM Proposal, the general possibility of a future cut to home health reimbursement and Kindred’s difficulties in meeting management financial projections and internal budgets. The Transaction Committee and representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors discussed the market’s reaction to the HHGM Proposal and the sensitivity of Kindred’s stock price to these types of unexpected developments relating to government reimbursement programs, given Kindred’s leveraged capital structure. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred. Representatives of senior management then discussed the recent efforts to restructure Kindred’s insurance program. Discussions ensued on the potential value of the restructuring and its permanent nature. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors indicated that the Consortium was not aware of this insurance restructuring and that the Consortium might be willing to revise its bid after learning about the insurance restructuring. The Transaction Committee directed senior management and representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors to inform the Consortium about the proposed insurance restructuring and to request a higher bid with an updated timeline.

Following this meeting, at the direction of the Transaction Committee, representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities met telephonically with representatives of the Consortium to discuss the near-term cash value associated with the insurance restructuring and requested a revised proposal reflecting this benefit.

On October 10, 2017, the Consortium submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a revised oral non-binding proposal to acquire Kindred for $8.25 per share in cash, representing a 31% premium to the closing price of Kindred’s common stock on October 9, 2017. The Consortium indicated the revised proposal reflected the benefits of the insurance restructuring, some of which were offset by (i) the fact that the underlying liabilities that had previously been insured would continue to remain outstanding, (ii) other adverse liquidity and tax consequences of the insurance restructuring and (iii) other downward revisions to earnings expectations based on its recent due diligence analyses.

On October 12, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Broussard met in Louisville, Kentucky, at which Mr. Breier conveyed his disappointment with the revised October 10 proposal and the length of the diligence process to date. Mr. Breier expressed his concern as to whether the Consortium was committed to pursuing a transaction with Kindred. Mr. Broussard indicated that Humana, TPG and WCAS continued to be very interested and committed to a potential transaction with Kindred. Mr. Breier requested that the Consortium provide a revised written offer with a path to entering into a definitive agreement in the near term. Mr. Broussard indicated he would have a discussion with TPG and WCAS to determine whether the Consortium would provide a revised proposal at $9.00 per share in cash, representing a 46% premium to the closing price of Kindred’s common stock on October 11, 2017. Mr. Broussard expressed the view, however, that the Consortium would be unwilling to pay more than $9.00 per share.

On October 12, 2017, the Consortium submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a revised non-binding written proposal to acquire Kindred at $9.00 per share in cash, representing a 46% premium to the closing price of Kindred’s common stock on October 11, 2017. The letter stated that the $9.00 per share proposal

57

represented an effort to productively advance the dialogue with Kindred and reiterated that the Consortium was not able to justify paying more than $9.00 per share. The letter also noted that the $9.00 per share proposal reflected both positive and negative indications from the results of the Consortium’s due diligence to date, including information provided by Kindred regarding challenges in the LTAC business, additional information on Kindred’s expected cash at close and revised lower expectations for 2017, the Consortium’s assumption that the discussions with Ventas would not result in material adverse consequences to Kindred or to the Consortium and the Consortium’s assumption as to an outcome on the HHGM Proposal.

On October 13, 2017, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss, among other things, the recent price performance of Kindred common stock and the revised Consortium proposal, including Mr. Broussard’s statement that the $9.00 per share in cash was the highest price the Consortium was prepared to pay. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors informed the Board that on September 14, 2017, the Financial Party E consortium had declined to continue further exploration of a potential transaction, citing the need for a strategic partner. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred. Representatives of senior management discussed the impact of Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma on Kindred’s third quarter results and the potential impact of the HHGM Proposal and similar changes. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors and the Board then discussed next steps in the process, including finalizing diligence and scheduling a meeting with Ventas and the Consortium. The Board directed representatives of senior management, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities to continue engaging with the Consortium.

On October 21, 2017, the Consortium sent Kindred a deck illustrating a step-by-step plan for the proposed transaction structure, including the steps involved to separate Kindred into HomecareCo and HospitalCo.

On October 22, 2017, the Consortium sent representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors draft materials for a meeting with Ventas and a revised draft of the deck illustrating in greater detail a step-by-step plan for the proposed transaction structure.

Between October 23, 2017 and October 26, 2017, the Consortium had in-person meetings with Kindred to discuss confirmatory commercial diligence, key business segments, financial modeling, operations/separation and compliance matters.

On October 23, 2017, Kindred provided the Consortium with a draft merger agreement.

Also on October 23, 2017, representatives of Kindred, TPG, Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP (“Debevoise”), outside legal counsel to TPG and WCAS, and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson (“Fried Frank”), outside legal counsel to Humana, had a conference call to discuss the proposed structure slides with a particular focus on how the relevant steps might affect the Ventas master lease change of control analysis.

On October 24, 2017, Mr. Breier met telephonically with Ms. Cafaro to further discuss the potential acquisition of Kindred by the Consortium.

On October 26, 2017, Messrs. Broussard and Breier discussed the potential transaction telephonically in anticipation of the upcoming meeting with Ventas scheduled for October 30, 2017 in Chicago, Illinois.

On October 27, 2017, representatives of Cleary Gottlieb, Kindred, Debevoise and Fried Frank had a conference call to discuss diligence matters related to the separation of Kindred into HomecareCo and HospitalCo including the carve out financial statements that would be required in connection with the Consortium’s financing.

On October 30, 2017, Mr. Breier, Mr. Broussard, Mr. Jeff Rhodes, partner at TPG, and Mr. Scott Mackesy, managing partner at WCAS, met in person with Ms. Cafaro and Mr. John Cobb, Executive Vice President and

58

Chief Investment Officer of Ventas, to discuss the Consortium’s potential acquisition of Kindred and simultaneous separation of Kindred into HomecareCo and HospitalCo. The parties discussed next steps, and Ms. Cafaro requested additional detail on the structure, capitalization and pro forma financial statements of HospitalCo on a go-forward basis.

On November 1, 2017, CMS released its final rule for the home health care prospective payment system 2018 update without finalizing the HHGM Proposal. CMS indicated that it was not finalizing the HHGM Proposal and that it would take additional time to further engage with stakeholders to move towards a system that shifted the focus from volume of services to a more patient-centered model. The CMS announcement had a minimal impact on the trading value of Kindred’s common stock.

Also on November 1, 2017, the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board met in person with representatives of senior management at a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss, among other things, the compensation issues that would arise in connection with the potential transaction. At this meeting, senior management discussed the incentive compensation awards pursuant to Kindred’s short-term incentive plan and long-term incentive plan and their potential treatment under the merger agreement. In addition, the Executive Compensation Committee and senior management discussed the proposed terms of deal bonus and retention bonus pools to provide incentives for a successful completion of the transaction and integration planning. The Executive Compensation Committee directed senior management to continue to engage with the Consortium regarding treatment of incentive compensation and other retention matters.

On November 1 and 2, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. Representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb joined a portion of the meeting to discuss developments relating to the Consortium. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reported that the Consortium continued to conduct confirmatory diligence and had indicated it was moving closer to signing a definitive agreement. Mr. Breier summarized the October 30 meeting with Ms. Cafaro and representatives of the Consortium. Representatives of senior management reviewed with the Board the updated Kindred financial model for the fiscal years 2017 through 2022, which were circulated to the Board prior to the meeting. Representatives of senior management discussed with the Board the key drivers and assumptions of and the rationale for the revised financial projections, which included, among other things, accounting for an updated lower 2017 forecast, the insurance restructuring and reduced expectations for Kindred’s post-acute benefits management strategy in later years. Representatives of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their preliminary financial analyses relating to Kindred. The Board and representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors discussed that (i) the shares of diversified healthcare companies often trade at a discount relative to the sum of the intrinsic values of such companies’ respective business lines and (ii) the sum of the intrinsic values of Kindred’s business lines in its entirety was not necessarily indicative of the value that would be obtained in a series of divestiture, spin-off or other business separation transactions because such sum of intrinsic values would not reflect all potentially significant friction costs that would be associated with separating Kindred’s business lines, including dis-synergies, potential tax leakage and debt breakage costs. The Board, along with senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors, then revisited potential strategic alternatives to extract value from the Kindred at Home business, as well as deleveraging alternatives as a standalone public company, that had been discussed during the August 2, 2017 Board meeting. Following discussion, the Board determined that these alternatives did not provide Kindred stockholders with greater value than the standalone plan nor did they provide greater certainty of value, due to various factors including the potential debt breakage costs, dis-synergies and tax leakage associated with these transactions and that most alternatives would not yield cash to Kindred stockholders. The Board discussed whether to ask the Consortium for an increased price in light of CMS’ determination to not finalize the HHGM Proposal at this time. Representatives of senior management and Kindred’s financial advisors noted that Kindred lacked visibility into how the Consortium accounted for the HHGM Proposal in their financial model. The Board also discussed the potential risk in asking for a higher price in light of Mr. Broussard’s statement that $9.00 was the highest price the Consortium was prepared to pay, and the Board determined to wait until after the next earnings announcement to consider raising the question.

59

On November 2, 2017 and November 9, 2017, respectively, the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Committee on Finance each introduced tax reform legislation under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which we refer to as the “Tax Bill”. The proposed Tax Bill would, among other things, lower the federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 20%, limit the deduction for net interest expense, place a cap on the utilization of net operating losses arising after December 31, 2017 at 80% of taxable income and eliminate the ability to carryback net operating losses.

On November 5, 2017, the Consortium sent to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a draft exclusivity agreement, which provided for an exclusivity period through November 21, 2017, with an extension through November 29, 2017. At the direction of the Board, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors communicated to representatives of the Consortium that, before assessing whether to agree to exclusivity, Kindred would need confirmation that the Consortium had concluded all material diligence and would need to review the Consortium’s markup of the merger agreement. The parties’ respective legal counsel exchanged comments on the draft exclusivity agreement, but the agreement was not ultimately executed.

Also on November 6, 2017, Kindred announced its third quarter 2017 earnings results, lowered its earning guidance for 2018 and described the impact of its insurance restructuring. In addition, on November 6, House Speaker Paul Ryan indicated that in 2018 the House of Representatives planned to revisit entitlement reform to address the U.S. debt and deficit.

On November 7, 2017, Kindred’s closing share price was $8.40, which reflected a 40% increase to Kindred’s closing share price on November 6. Equity research analysts covering Kindred attributed meaningful equity value primarily to information regarding Kindred’s insurance restructuring.

Also on November 7, 2017, the principals and functional leaders from the Consortium again met with representatives of Kindred in Louisville, Kentucky to discuss the operations of Kindred at Home.

On November 8, 2017, Debevoise sent Cleary Gottlieb initial comments to the merger agreement.

On November 9, 2017, Mr. Broussard called Mr. Breier to express his concern on various outstanding diligence questions related to how Humana would interface with Kindred at Home in order to achieve certain clinical outcomes.

On November 11, 2017, Messrs. Breier and Hunter met telephonically to discuss an upcoming diligence meeting related to Kindred at Home and whether Humana remained committed to moving forward with a potential transaction.

On November 12, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Debevoise and Fried Frank to provide high-level feedback on the issues presented by their comments to the merger agreement. These issues included, among others: (1) bifurcation of a number of the provisions between the Homecare Business and the Hospital Business; (2) the additional conditionality presented by the separate HomecareCo material adverse effect and HospitalCo material adverse effect definitions and related closing conditions; (3) certain additional closing conditions, including with respect to the state licensure approvals and the percentage of stockholders asserting appraisal rights; (4) that Kindred’s obligation to deliver officer’s certificates to Parent and HospitalCo Parent’s financing sources, certifying the solvency of the Homecare Business and the Hospital Business after giving effect to the separation transactions, was not qualified by any standard of efforts, and that Kindred’s inability to deliver either or both of such certificates would excuse Parent and HospitalCo Parent from having to close the transaction and from paying a reverse termination fee in such circumstance; (5) the obligation for Kindred to reimburse Parent’s expenses in the event Kindred’s stockholders voted against the deal in the absence of a competing proposal (a so-called “naked no vote”); (6) the Consortium’s refusal to reimburse Kindred’s separation expenses in the event of a naked no vote or change in recommendation; and (7) reduced flexibility with respect to the completion of the SNF divestiture.

60

On November 13 and 14, 2017, functional leaders from the Consortium held in-person meetings in Louisville, Kentucky with representatives from Kindred to conduct further due diligence, primarily focused on Kindred at Home. Also on November 13, with the consent of Kindred, Mr. Broussard had breakfast with David Causby, Executive Vice President and President of Kindred at Home, to discuss generally and in no specific terms his duties and responsibilities with Kindred.

On November 15, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb and Reed Smith LP, Kindred’s outside regulatory counsel, had a teleconference with Debevoise, Fried Frank and outside regulatory counsel to the Consortium, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. and Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, to discuss state healthcare regulatory approvals. Later that day on November 15, Cleary Gottlieb had a teleconference with Debevoise and Fried Frank to discuss the Consortium’s request of Ventas that Ventas formally acknowledge that the potential transaction complies with the Ventas master lease and provide a covenant not to sue.

On November 16, 2017, the Tax Bill proposed by the House Ways and Means Committee passed in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Also on November 16, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with a revised draft of the merger agreement.

On November 17, 2017, the Transaction Committee met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided an update on developments with the Consortium since the November 2 Board meeting, noting that the Consortium continued to conduct due diligence and had an upcoming meeting scheduled to determine if any material due diligence items remained outstanding and to discuss next steps. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors reviewed the developments in the negotiations between the Consortium and Ventas, noting that representatives of the Consortium had stated that the Consortium was seeking a formal agreement with Ventas. The Consortium proposed to Ventas that such agreement would acknowledge that the transaction complied with the Ventas master lease and would contain a release from all claims related to the transaction and a covenant not to sue any of the parties related to the transaction. The Transaction Committee revisited the topic of whether or not to re-engage on price, and decided it would be best to await the outcome of discussions with Ventas before making this decision. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also reviewed with the Transaction Committee their preliminary financial analyses relating to a theoretical joint venture with Humana with respect to the Kindred at Home business. At the direction of the Board, these analyses had been supplemented to include a potential transaction structure in which the joint venture would be implemented while keeping Kindred’s existing indebtedness in place. Following review of these analyses, the Transaction Committee determined that, while resulting in reduced debt breakage costs, such a structure would be challenging to implement as it would result in a joint venture that was largely restricted from issuing indebtedness and operationally constrained under Kindred’s existing credit agreements and indentures. Representatives from Kindred and Cleary Gottlieb then discussed the key open issues in the merger agreement, which included (1) the additional conditionality presented by the separate HomecareCo and HospitalCo material adverse effect definitions, (2) the appraisal rights closing condition, (3) the state licensure closing condition, (4) the size of termination fee and reverse termination fee and the circumstances in which each would be payable, (5) reimbursement of Kindred’s and the Consortium’s expenses and the circumstances in which each would be payable and (6) treatment of certain outstanding and expected incentive compensation awards and retention matters.

On November 21, 2017, the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management to discuss the estimated 280G calculations that had been provided to the Consortium.

On November 22, 2017, Debevoise provided Cleary Gottlieb with a revised draft of the merger agreement and an initial draft of the separation agreement. Also on November 22, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with a draft of the disclosure schedules to the merger agreement.

61

On November 26, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Debevoise and Fried Frank to discuss key issues in the separation agreement.

On November 28, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Debevoise and Fried Frank to discuss the employment and benefits issues raised by the Consortium’s draft of the separation agreement.

Also on November 28, 2017, Mr. Breier called Ms. Cafaro to discuss the Consortium’s potential acquisition of Kindred and the Consortium’s request that Ventas enter into an agreement that acknowledges that the transaction structure complies with the Ventas lease and provides a full release/waiver of claims and covenant not to sue. Ms. Cafaro expressed the view that the request for a full release/waiver of claims was unacceptable but that she would be constructive in her negotiations with the Consortium. Later that evening, Ventas’ outside legal counsel contacted representatives of Debevoise to discuss the Consortium’s request.

In connection with finalizing arrangements with co-investors, TPG requested that Kindred provide a waiver to Cleary Gottlieb, permitting lawyers from Cleary Gottlieb’s investment funds practice, who serve as TPG’s regular counsel with respect to investment fund structuring, to provide structuring advice to TPG in connection with the potential transaction, subject to the use of separate teams and customary information barriers. Kindred provided such waiver on November 28, 2017.

On December 1, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Debevoise and Fried Frank to discuss issues raised by the Consortium’s draft of the merger agreement. During this meeting, representatives of Cleary Gottlieb proposed a Kindred termination fee based on 3.5% of Kindred’s equity value and a Consortium reverse termination fee based on 10% of Kindred’s enterprise value. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb argued that, in light of Kindred’s leverage, equity value was not the appropriate metric by which to calculate the reverse termination fee, and could result in an insufficient reverse termination fee for a transaction of this size. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb also noted that a target company’s obligation to deliver solvency certificates with respect to the target company in connection with a buyer’s debt financing is often subject to a reasonable best efforts standard, and that a financing failure arising from the failure of a target company to deliver such certificates, absent some other failure of a condition, is often a risk borne by a buyer, including by payment of the reverse termination fee. Representatives of Debevoise and Fried Frank noted that they disagreed with Cleary Gottlieb’s characterizations of prevailing market practice with regard to the metric by which to calculate the reverse termination fee and whether the solvency certificate delivery covenant is often subject to a reasonable best efforts standard.

On December 2, 2017, the U.S. Senate passed an amended version of the Tax Bill.

On December 3, 2017, Kindred entered into a clean team agreement with Humana, pursuant to which Kindred subsequently provided to select advisors to Humana limited information pertaining to Kindred’s third-party payor agreements applicable to the Kindred at Home operations.

On December 4, 2017, the Financial Party E consortium submitted to representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors a term sheet for a proposed $650 million preferred stock investment in Kindred, convertible into common stock at a 15-20% premium to market. The proposed terms contemplated a fixed coupon of 8% per annum and contained a variety of other investor-friendly features, including a right for the holders to demand redemption at the 6^th anniversary of the closing, significant protections for the preferred stockholders and the right to require Kindred to merge or sell or liquidate the Company upon the fifth anniversary of the closing.

Also on December 4, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with a revised draft of the separation agreement. Later that day, Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise and Fried Frank held a conference call to discuss open issues raised by the Consortium’s draft of the merger agreement.

62

On December 5, 2017, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors and the Board discussed the terms proposed in the Financial Party E consortium’s term sheet. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors also provided updates on developments with the Consortium, including with respect to their financing sources and certain issues related to the allocation among the Consortium members of tail liabilities from the skilled nursing facility business. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors and Mr. Breier discussed the negotiations between Ventas and the Consortium. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors noted that the Consortium had requested to have discussions with certain members of senior management regarding compensation matters.

Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb then reviewed the Board’s fiduciary duties in connection with a sale of Kindred. The Board noted the extensive process Kindred had engaged in and highlighted the lack of other potential bidders remaining, despite the April 19, 2017 press report that Kindred was engaged in a potential sale transaction, and the significant number of bidders involved. The Board then discussed the risks Kindred faced by remaining a standalone public company. Representatives of senior management and Cleary Gottlieb reviewed these risks, which included, among others, risks related to reimbursement in each of its home health, LTAC and IRF businesses, continued admissions pressure on post-acute care providers, Kindred’s leveraged capital structure, as well as a volatile regulatory and litigation environment generally and the potential for further developments therein. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb then discussed the key open issues in the merger agreement which included (1) the conditionality presented by, among other things, the separate HomecareCo and HospitalCo material adverse effect closing conditions, the closing condition requiring receipt of all applicable state licensure approvals and the closing conditions regarding completion of the sale of all skilled nursing facilities and the percentage of stockholders asserting appraisal rights, (2) treatment of certain outstanding and expected incentive compensation and retention matters, (3) the size of the termination fee and reverse termination fee and the circumstances in which each would be payable and (4) reimbursement of Kindred’s and the Consortium’s expenses and the circumstances in which each would be payable. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb mentioned that Debevoise conveyed some flexibility on these issues but noted that the Consortium was unwilling to make any concessions prior to solidifying terms with Ventas and finalizing the business arrangement amongst the Consortium members. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb and the Board discussed considerations with respect to the termination fees and the Board concluded that the Board would accept a higher termination fee paid by Kindred in order to obtain a higher reverse termination fee from the Consortium. The Board also noted that the dual material adverse effect conditions may be unavoidable in light of the Consortium’s need for separate financings for HomecareCo and HospitalCo. The Board discussed that the Consortium’s plans with respect to the separation had increased the value the Consortium was able to offer Kindred’s stockholders in the transaction, and that this value generated through the separation was an acceptable trade-off for the potential incremental conditionality imposed by the separation structure. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb proceeded to review the Consortium’s position on treatment of the incentive awards and other retention matters. Representatives of senior management and the Board discussed the importance of ensuring that employees are incentivized to remain with Kindred following the announcement of the transaction, in light of the uncertainty and changes that would result therefrom.

Next, representatives of senior management discussed with the Board their updated lower financial projections for the fiscal years 2017 to 2022, including the key drivers and assumptions of, and rationale for the changes to the financial projections shared with the Board at the November 2 meeting. These changes included updates to reflect third quarter actual results, refined assumptions with respect to the insurance restructuring and LTAC hospital closings. Representatives of each of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities then reviewed with the Board their respective relationships disclosure letters dated December 1, 2017. Cleary Gottlieb also discussed that TPG was a significant client of Cleary Gottlieb. Next, representatives of each of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities reviewed their respective preliminary financial analyses of Kindred. The respective preliminary financial analyses of Kindred prepared by each of Kindred’s financial advisors were based on management’s financial projections and, at the direction of senior management, sensitivity scenarios assuming Kindred achieved 95% or 90%, respectively, of the revenue and EBITDAR projections included in management’s financial

63

projections. The Board discussed whether to request that the Consortium increase its proposed $9.00 per share price. After discussion, the Board members present unanimously affirmed the view of the Board that $9.00 was a price that represented the maximum value available to Kindred’s stockholders and noted the risks that would arise if Kindred requested a price increase. Representatives of senior management reviewed the terms of the exclusive forum bylaw amendment and noted that the Board would likely be asked to approve this amendment at the next meeting. The Board then granted senior management permission to engage in employment discussions with the Consortium.

On December 6, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb had a conference call with Debevoise and Fried Frank to discuss the merger agreement.

On December 7, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with a revised draft of the merger agreement.

In connection with its antitrust analysis, TPG requested that Kindred provide a waiver to Cleary Gottlieb, permitting Cleary Gottlieb’s Brussels antitrust team to review whether any non-United States competition filings would be required in connection with the potential transaction, subject to the use of separate teams and customary information barriers. Kindred provided such waiver on December 8, 2017.

On December 10, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb received initial comments to disclosure schedules from Debevoise.

On December 11, 2017, at the direction senior management, representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided the Consortium with an update with respect to Kindred’s results as of November 30, 2017.

On December 12, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb received a revised draft of the merger agreement from Debevoise.

Also on December 13, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb received initial drafts of the limited guarantees from Debevoise.

On December 14, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting. Representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb joined the portion of the meeting relating to the potential sale of Kindred. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors provided an update on the negotiations between the Consortium and Ventas. Representatives of Kindred’s financial advisors indicated that the Consortium continued to work on due diligence matters, including a particular focus on Kindred’s recent underperformance compared to budget, the insurance restructuring and related tax and liquidity consequences and revised expectations relating to the SNF divestiture, and noting that representatives of the Consortium had indicated the Consortium was still in the process of securing financing, but that it believed that it would ultimately finalize such financing arrangements. Mr. Breier provided an update on developments in the negotiations relating to compensation and treatment of employees, and updated the Board that, as previously authorized by the Board, both he and David Causby were negotiating term sheets for their future employment with HospitalCo and HomecareCo, respectively. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb then discussed the other key open issues in the merger agreement, indicating that, as directed by the Board, Kindred had agreed to standalone “no material adverse effect” conditions with respect to each of HomecareCo and HospitalCo, and that the Consortium had dropped its request for a closing condition with respect to appraisal rights. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb noted that the parties had also agreed on a list of 11 key state licensure approvals, the receipt of which would constitute a closing condition, and that the Consortium had agreed to payment of a reverse termination fee if the merger agreement were terminated at the end date and such approvals had not been obtained due to actions or omissions by, or circumstances relating to, the Consortium. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb indicated that the parties were continuing to negotiate the size of the reverse termination fee as well as certain specified events that would result in a material adverse effect under the merger agreement.

On December 15, 2017, the Board met in person with representatives of senior management for a regularly scheduled meeting at which they discussed, among other things, Kindred’s financial model. A representative of

64

Cleary Gottlieb joined the portion of the meeting relating to Kindred’s financial model. Representatives of senior management reviewed the role of the Board in approving financial projections for Kindred’s financial advisors to use for purposes of their fairness analysis. The Board, senior management and Cleary Gottlieb discussed how such financial projections should reflect senior management and the Board’s best estimate of how Kindred would perform over the relevant period. Senior management then discussed the Kindred financial model and the “95%” and “90%” sensitivity analyses that had been previously shared with the Board and noted that the Kindred financial model represented an aspirational or “upside” case, while the 90% sensitivity analysis reflected a “downside” case. Senior management noted that, based both on historical performance and senior management’s expectations, the “95%” sensitivity analysis would be expected to be closest to Kindred’s future performance. Senior management had determined that two revisions should be made to the financial model in order to provide the Board with senior management’s best estimate of Kindred’s future performance. The first change built a contingency into the financial model beginning in the fiscal year 2019 to reflect Kindred’s historical and ongoing inability to meet its operational budget targets and the risks facing Kindred, particularly on the reimbursement front. The second change deleted cash flows related to Kindred’s possible expansion into the post-acute benefits management space, a line of business Kindred was still developing and thus was viewed as speculative. Following discussion, the Board approved the revised financial projections proposed by senior management and authorized senior management to share these projections with Kindred’s financial advisors for purposes of their respective financial analyses and fairness opinions.

On December 15, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with a revised draft of the merger agreement.

On December 16, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb received initial drafts of the equity commitment letters from Debevoise.

Also on December 16, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb provided Debevoise and Fried Frank with revised drafts of the separation agreement, limited guarantees, equity commitment letters and disclosure schedules.

On the morning of December 17, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb sent representatives of TPG, WCAS, Humana, Debevoise and Fried Frank a global issues list setting forth the material open issues in the transaction documents. Early in the afternoon on December 17, 2017, representatives of Kindred, Humana, TPG, WCAS, Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise and Fried Frank held a teleconference to discuss and attempt to resolve these outstanding issues.

Later that day on December 17, 2017, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb to discuss status updates and the latest Tax Bill and its potential impact on Kindred.

Also on December 17, 2017, the Wall Street Journal published an article reporting that the Consortium was in advanced negotiations to acquire Kindred. The article identified the $9.00 per share purchase price and included details regarding the proposed transaction structure.

Throughout the remainder of December 17, 2017 and over the course of December 18 and December 19, 2017, representatives of Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise and Fried Frank exchanged drafts of the merger agreement, the accompanying disclosure schedules, the separation agreement, the equity commitment letters and the limited guarantees, and held various teleconferences to resolve outstanding issues with respect to these transaction documents. Additionally, during this time period the parties continued to discuss and engage with Ventas and its outside legal counsel regarding the terms of Ventas’ consent to the proposed transaction.

On the evening of December 18, 2017, the Board met telephonically with representatives of senior management, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb. Prior to the meeting, the Board received materials relating to their review of the potential transaction, including a presentation from Cleary Gottlieb

65

providing an overview of the Board’s fiduciary duties, a summary of the material terms of the transaction documents, proposed resolutions in connection with the potential transaction and certain financial analyses materials prepared by representatives of each of Barclays and Guggenheim Securities. Mr. Breier began with an update on the developments that had occurred that day. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb reviewed in detail the terms of the merger agreement, with a particular focus on the representations and warranties, interim operating covenants, closing conditions and risk allocation, the “no shop” and “fiduciary out” provisions, termination, termination fees and expense reimbursement. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb then proceeded to review the material terms of the equity commitment letters, limited guarantees and debt commitments, and Kindred’s obligations to cooperate with Parent and HospitalCo Parent’s arrangement of the debt financing. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb noted that, after prolonged negotiation, the Consortium had continued to insist that, in the event the Consortium could not obtain financing because of the inability of a Kindred officer to deliver solvency certificates with respect to either the Homecare Business or the Hospital Business, the Consortium would not be obligated to close and would not be required to pay the reverse termination fee. Representatives of Cleary Gottlieb then reviewed the Board’s fiduciary duties. At the request of the Board, representatives of Barclays reviewed its financial analyses of the transaction and rendered to the Board an oral opinion (which was subsequently confirmed by delivery of a written opinion dated December 18, 2017) that as of December 18, 2017 and based upon and subject to the qualifications, limitations, factors and assumptions set forth in Barclays’ written opinion, from a financial point of view, the merger consideration of $9.00 per share in cash to be received by stockholders of Kindred (other than holders of excluded shares) was fair to such holders. Then, at the request of the Board, Guggenheim Securities presented its financial analyses of the transaction and delivered to the Board an oral opinion, (which was subsequently confirmed by delivery of a written opinion dated December 18, 2017) that, and based on and subject to the matters considered, the procedures followed, the assumptions made and various limitations of and qualifications to the review undertaken, the merger consideration of $9.00 per share in cash was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares). The Board asked numerous questions of senior management and representatives of Barclays, Guggenheim Securities and Cleary Gottlieb and discussed certain risks associated with, and the advantages and rationale for entering into, the proposed transaction, including a discussion of the factors described in the section entitled “Recommendation of the Board and Reasons for the Merger.” The Board also discussed the advantages and risks generally and specifically with respect to potentially requesting a price increase. After discussion, the Board adopted resolutions determining that the merger agreement and the separation agreement were advisable and in the best interest of Kindred’s stockholders, adopting the merger agreement, recommending that Kindred stockholders adopt the merger agreement and approve the transactions contemplated thereby at a special meeting, and adopting an exclusive bylaw provision.

On December 19, 2017, Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise and Fried Frank finalized and the parties executed the merger agreement and the other documentation related to the transaction. Debevoise provided executed financing commitment papers providing for the Consortium’s committed financing concurrently with the execution of the merger agreement. Additionally, on December 19, 2017, an agreement was entered into between Ventas and Kindred whereby Ventas agreed to a covenant not to sue and Kindred agreed to pay Ventas an additional transaction fee in an amount equal to $5 million, among certain other amendments to the Ventas master lease.

On December 19, 2017, prior to the commencement of trading of Kindred’s and Humana’s common stock on the NYSE, Kindred, TPG, WCAS and Humana issued a joint press release announcing the proposed transaction.

Recommendation of the Board and Reasons for the Merger

The Board recommends that you vote “FOR” the merger proposal.

At a meeting of the Board held on December 18, 2017, the Board determined that the merger agreement and the separation agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger and the separation, are fair to, and in the best interests of, Kindred stockholders, approved and declared advisable the execution, delivery

66

and performance of the merger agreement and the separation agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated thereby, directed that the merger agreement be submitted to Kindred stockholders for adoption and resolved to recommend that Kindred stockholders vote to adopt the merger agreement. The approval and recommendation set forth above were unanimously approved by the Board, other than Dr. Sharad Mansukani, who recused himself from the Board’s deliberations over and approval of the merger because Dr. Mansukani serves as a Senior Advisor to TPG.

When you consider the Board’s recommendation, you should be aware that Kindred’s directors and executive officers may have interests in the merger that may be different from, or in addition to, the interests of Kindred stockholders generally. These interests are described in the section entitled “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Interests of Kindred Executive Officers and Directors in the Merger.”

In reaching its decision, the Board met and consulted with Kindred’s senior management, financial advisors and outside legal counsel. The Board also reviewed a significant amount of information and considered a number of factors with respect to the merger and the other transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including, among others, the following factors (not necessarily in order of relative importance) which the Board viewed as being generally positive or favorable in coming to its determination, approval and related recommendation:

67

68

69

70

In reaching its decision, the Board also considered a number of potentially negative factors with respect to the merger and the other transactions contemplated by the merger agreement including, among others, the following (not necessarily in the order of relative importance):

71

While the Board considered potentially positive and potentially negative factors, the Board concluded that, overall, the potentially positive factors outweighed the potentially negative factors. Accordingly, the Board determined that the merger, merger agreement and the other transactions contemplated by the merger agreement are fair to and in the best interests of Kindred and its stockholders.

The foregoing discussion is not intended to be an exhaustive list of the information and factors considered by the Board in its consideration of the merger, but includes the material positive factors and material negative factors considered by the Board in that regard. In view of the number and variety of factors and the amount of information considered, the Board did not find it practicable to, nor did it attempt to, make specific assessments of, quantify, or otherwise assign relative weights to, the specific factors considered in reaching its determination. In addition, individual members of the Board may have given different weights to different factors. Based on the totality of the information presented, the members of the Board (other than Dr. Mansukani, who recused himself from the Board’s deliberations over and approval of the merger, as described above) unanimously reached the decision to approve, and declare as fair to and in the best interests of Kindred and its stockholders, the merger agreement, the separation agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger and the separation, in light of the factors described above and the other factors that such members of the Board felt were appropriate.

Portions of this explanation of Kindred’s reasons for the merger and other information presented in this section are forward-looking in nature and, therefore, should be read in light of the section entitled “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” beginning on page [●].

Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors

Opinion of Barclays

Kindred engaged Barclays to act as its financial advisor in connection with Kindred’s consideration of strategic alternatives, including the merger, pursuant to an engagement letter dated as of December 16, 2016. On December 18, 2017, Barclays rendered its oral opinion (which was subsequently confirmed in writing) to the Board that, as of December 18, 2017 and based upon and subject to the qualifications, limitations, factors and assumptions stated in its opinion, from a financial point of view, the consideration to be received by the stockholders of Kindred (other than holders of excluded shares) was fair to such stockholders.

The full text of Barclays’ written opinion, dated as of December 18, 2017, is attached as Annex C. Barclays’ written opinion sets forth, among other things, the assumptions made, procedures followed, factors considered and limitations upon the review undertaken by Barclays in rendering its opinion. Barclays provided advisory services and its opinion for the information and assistance of the Board in connection with its consideration of the merger. Kindred encourages you to read the opinion carefully in its entirety. The Barclays opinion is not a recommendation as to how any holder of Kindred common stock

72

should vote with respect to the merger or any other matter. Barclays’ opinion addresses only the fairness, from a financial point of view and as of the date of such opinion, of the merger consideration to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares) to the extent expressly specified in such opinion and does not address any other term, aspect or implication of (i) the merger or the separation (including, without limitation, the form or structure of the merger or the separation), (ii) the merger agreement and the separation agreement or (iii) any other agreement, transaction document or instrument contemplated by the merger agreement or the separation agreement or to be entered into or amended in connection with the merger or the separation. The following is a summary of Barclays’ opinion and the methodology that Barclays used to render its opinion. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the opinion.

Barclays’ opinion, the issuance of which was approved by Barclays’ Valuation and Fairness Opinion Committee, is addressed to the Board, addresses only the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the consideration to be offered to the stockholders of Kindred and does not constitute a recommendation to any stockholder of Kindred as to how such stockholder should vote with respect to the merger or any other matter. The terms of the proposed transaction were determined through arm’s-length negotiations between Kindred, TPG, WCAS and Humana and were approved by the Board. Barclays did not recommend any specific form of consideration to Kindred or that any specific form of consideration constituted the only appropriate consideration for the merger. Barclays was not requested to address, and its opinion does not in any manner address, Kindred’s underlying business decision to proceed with or effect the proposed transaction, the likelihood of the consummation of the proposed transaction, or the relative merits of the proposed transaction as compared to any other transaction or business strategy in which Kindred may engage. In addition, Barclays expressed no opinion on, and its opinion does not in any manner address, the fairness of the amount or the nature of any compensation to any officers, directors or employees of any parties to the proposed transaction, or any class of such persons, relative to the consideration to be offered to the stockholders of Kindred in the merger. Furthermore, Barclays expressed no opinion on, and its opinion does not in any manner address, the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement. No limitations were imposed by the Board upon Barclays with respect to the investigations made or procedures followed by it in rendering its opinion.

In arriving at its opinion, Barclays, among other things:

73

In arriving at its opinion, Barclays assumed and relied upon the accuracy and completeness of the financial and other information used by Barclays without any independent verification of such information (and did not assume responsibility or liability for any independent verification of such information). Barclays also relied upon the assurances of management of Kindred that they were not aware of any facts or circumstances that would make such information inaccurate or misleading in any material respect. With respect to the financial projections of Kindred, upon the instruction of Kindred, Barclays assumed that such projections were reasonably prepared on a basis reflecting the best currently available estimates and judgments of the management of Kindred as to Kindred’s future financial performance and that Kindred would perform substantially in accordance with such projections. With respect to the NOL projections of Kindred, at the instruction of Kindred, Barclays assumed that the amounts of the NOL projections were reasonably prepared on a basis reflecting the best currently available estimates and judgments of the management of Kindred as to the future utilization of net operating losses by Kindred and that the net operating losses contained in the NOL projections would be substantially realized in accordance with such estimates. In arriving at its opinion, Barclays assumed no responsibility for and expressed no view as to any such projections or estimates or the assumptions on which they were based. In arriving at its opinion, Barclays did not conduct a physical inspection of the properties and facilities of Kindred and did not make or obtain any evaluations or appraisals of the assets or liabilities of Kindred. Barclays’ opinion was necessarily based upon market, economic and other conditions as they existed on, and could be evaluated as of, December 18, 2017. Barclays assumed no responsibility for updating or revising its opinion based on events or circumstances that may have occurred after December 18, 2017.

Barclays assumed that the executed merger agreement would conform in all material respects to the last draft reviewed by Barclays. Additionally, Barclays assumed the accuracy of the representations and warranties contained in the merger agreement and all agreements related thereto. Barclays also assumed, at the instruction of Kindred, that all material governmental, regulatory and third party approvals, consents and releases for the proposed transaction would be obtained within the constraints contemplated by the merger agreement and that the merger would be consummated in accordance with the terms of the merger agreement without waiver, modification or amendment of any material term, condition or agreement thereof. Barclays did not undertake, and is under no obligation, to update, revise, reaffirm or withdraw its opinion, for events occurring or coming to its attention after December 18, 2017, including potential changes in U.S. tax and other laws, regulations and government policies and the enforcement thereof as have been or may be proposed or effected. Barclays did not express any opinion as to any tax or other consequences that might result from the proposed transaction, nor did Barclays’ opinion address any legal, tax, regulatory or accounting matters, as to which Barclays understood Kindred had obtained such advice as it deemed necessary from qualified professionals.

At the instruction of Kindred, Barclays’ opinion and the financial analyses Barclays performed in connection with rendering its opinion were based upon U.S. tax law as it existed on, and could be evaluated as of, December 18, 2017. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, subsequently signed into law on December 22, 2017, contains significant changes to U.S. tax law that was in effect on December 18, 2017 (including, but not limited to, a reduction in the corporate tax rate, limitations on the deductibility of interest expense, measures aimed at preventing base erosion, imposition of a territorial system on multinational corporations and limitations on NOL

74

carryforwards) which could materially affect Kindred’s tax position and results of operations. At the instruction of Kindred, Barclays’ opinion and the financial analyses Barclays performed in connection with rendering its opinion did not take into account any changes to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017, or any other potential effects that may result from changes to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017, including changes in market valuation of Kindred or any other companies, interest rates and government healthcare reimbursement rates under Medicare, Medicaid and other applicable government programs. At the instruction of Kindred, in addition to the financial analyses Barclays performed in connection with rendering its opinion, Barclays performed certain illustrative sensitivity analyses relating to certain potential changes to federal corporate tax rates and limitations on the deductibility of interest expenses as well as reductions in Medicare reimbursement rates for illustrative purposes only. Barclays assumed no responsibility for updating, revising, reaffirming or withdrawing its opinion or the financial analyses it performed in connection with rendering its opinion based on changes after December 18, 2017 to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017 or any other potential effects that may result from changes to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017.

In connection with rendering its opinion, Barclays performed certain financial, comparative and other analyses as summarized below. In arriving at its opinion, Barclays did not ascribe a specific range of values to the shares of Kindred common stock, but rather, made its determination as to fairness, from a financial point of view, to Kindred stockholders of the consideration to be offered to such stockholders in the merger on the basis of various financial and comparative analyses.

In arriving at its opinion, Barclays did not attribute any particular weight to any single analysis or factor considered by it, but rather, made qualitative judgments as to the significance and relevance of each analysis and factor relative to all other analyses and factors performed and considered by it and in the context of the circumstances of the particular transaction. Accordingly, Barclays believes that its analyses must be considered as a whole, as considering any portion of such analyses and factors, without considering all analyses and factors as a whole, could create a misleading or incomplete view of the process underlying its opinion.

Summary of Material Financial Analyses

The following is a summary of the material financial analyses used by Barclays in preparing its opinion to the Board. The summary of Barclays’ analyses and reviews provided below is not a complete description of the analyses and reviews underlying Barclays’ opinion. The preparation of a fairness opinion is a complex process involving various determinations as to the most appropriate and relevant methods of analysis and review and the application of those methods to particular circumstances, and, therefore, is not readily susceptible to summary description.

For the purposes of its analyses and reviews, Barclays made numerous assumptions with respect to industry performance, general business, economic, market and financial conditions and other matters, many of which are beyond the control of Kindred or any of the other parties to the proposed transaction. No company, business or transaction considered in Barclays’ analyses and reviews is identical to Kindred or the merger, and an evaluation of the results of those analyses and reviews is not entirely mathematical. Rather, the analyses and reviews involve complex considerations and judgments concerning financial and operating characteristics and other factors that could affect the acquisition, public trading or other values of the companies, businesses or transactions considered in Barclays’ analyses and reviews. None of Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent, Merger Sub, Hospital Merger Sub, TPG, WCAS, Humana, Barclays or any other person assumes responsibility if future results are materially different from those discussed. Any estimates contained in these analyses and reviews and the ranges of valuations resulting from any particular analysis or review are not necessarily indicative of actual values or predictive of future results or values, which may be significantly more or less favorable than as set forth below. In addition, analyses relating to the value of companies, businesses or securities do not purport to be appraisals or reflect the prices at which the companies, businesses or securities may actually be sold. Accordingly, the estimates used in, and the results derived from, Barclays’ analyses and reviews are inherently subject to substantial uncertainty.

75

The summary of the financial analyses and reviews summarized below include information presented in tabular format. In order to fully understand the financial analyses and reviews used by Barclays, the tables must be read together with the text of each summary, as the tables alone do not constitute a complete description of the financial analyses and reviews. Considering the data in the tables below without considering the full description of the analyses and reviews, including the methodologies and assumptions underlying the analyses and reviews, could create a misleading or incomplete view of Barclays’ analyses and reviews.

Discounted Cash Flow Analysis

In order to estimate the present value of Kindred common stock, Barclays performed a discounted cash flow analysis of Kindred. A discounted cash flow analysis is a traditional valuation methodology used to derive a valuation of an asset by calculating the “present value” of estimated future cash flows of the asset. “Present value” refers to the current value of future cash flows or amounts and is obtained by discounting those future cash flows or amounts by a discount rate that takes into account macroeconomic assumptions and estimates of risk, the opportunity cost of capital, expected returns and other appropriate factors.

Barclays performed a discounted cash flow analysis of Kindred based on estimates of unlevered free cash flows of Kindred based upon the Kindred projections to derive a range of implied present values per share of Kindred common stock. Barclays derived a range of implied enterprise values for Kindred by adding the present values of (i) estimates of after-tax unlevered free cash flows of Kindred for the three months ending December 31, 2017 and each of the fiscal years 2018 through 2022, calculated based upon the Kindred projections and guidance from Kindred management and (ii) a range of terminal values for Kindred derived by applying perpetuity growth rates ranging from 1.75% to 2.25% to the estimated terminal unlevered free cash flow for Kindred calculated based upon the Kindred projections and assuming depreciation equaled capital expenditures, each calculated utilizing discount rates ranging from 8.50% to 9.50%, reflecting estimates of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model. The after-tax unlevered free cash flows were calculated by taking the tax-affected earnings before interest, tax expense and amortization, with such amount treating stock-based compensation as a cash expense, adding depreciation, and subtracting capital expenditures, changes in working capital, noncontrolling interest distributions and certain other projected net cash outflows, per Kindred management. Barclays then calculated a range of implied prices per share of Kindred common stock by (i) subtracting the assumed amount of Kindred’s net debt (adjusted for insurance restructuring-related cash and the SNF divestiture, per Kindred management) and the book value of preferred stock (each as of September 30, 2017 and based on public filings and data from Kindred management), (ii) adding to such amount the estimated present value of the net operating loss carryforwards of Kindred based on the NOL projections and calculated utilizing discount rates of 8.50% to 9.50%, reflecting estimates of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and (iii) dividing such amount by the fully diluted number of shares of Kindred common stock based on data and calculations provided by Kindred management. The following summarizes the result of these calculations:

Barclays noted that on the basis of the discounted cash flow analysis, the consideration of $9.00 per share was above the range of implied values per share calculated using the Kindred projections and NOL projections.

Selected Precedent Transaction Analysis

Barclays reviewed and compared the purchase prices and financial multiples (including ratios of enterprise value to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) for the last twelve months (“LTM”) period (“EV to LTM EBITDA multiples”) for which financial information was publicly available at the time of announcement of the applicable transaction) paid in selected other transactions (based on data from

76

public filings, Wall Street research, Mergermarket and FactSet) that Barclays, based on its experience with merger and acquisition transactions, deemed relevant. Barclays chose such transactions based on, among other things, the similarity of the applicable target companies in the transactions to Kindred with respect to the business, financial and operating characteristics of their respective businesses. Barclays categorized the selected precedent transactions in four groups, which it referred to as Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, Contract Rehabilitation, Long-Term Acute Care and Homecare, in order to evaluate and compare those groups to Kindred’s respective lines of business.

The selected Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities transactions were as follows:

The selected Contract Rehabilitation transactions were as follows:

The selected Long-Term Acute Care transactions were as follows:

The selected Homecare transactions were as follows:

The reasons for and the circumstances surrounding each of the selected precedent transactions analyzed were diverse and there are inherent differences in the business, operations, financial characteristics and prospects of Kindred and the companies included in the selected precedent transaction analysis. Accordingly, Barclays believed that a purely quantitative selected precedent transaction analysis would not be particularly meaningful in the context of considering the merger. Barclays therefore made qualitative judgments concerning differences between the characteristics of the selected precedent transactions and the merger which would affect the acquisition values of the selected target companies and Kindred.

77

Based upon these judgments and the weighing of profitability from each business line, to calculate a range of enterprise values for Kindred, Barclays selected a blended range of 8.5x to 10.0x EV to LTM EBITDA multiples for Kindred and applied such range to Kindred’s EBITDA for the LTM period as of September 30, 2017, as adjusted to account for hurricane impacts, reductions in corporate overhead, the SNF divestiture and the closure of certain LTAC hospitals per Kindred management, both excluding and including further adjustments relating to projected future changes by CMS, per Kindred management, to the payment models under CMS for home health care and long-term acute care. Barclays then calculated a range of implied prices per share of Kindred common stock, both excluding and including the adjustments relating to projected future changes to the payment models under CMS for home health care and long-term acute care, by (i) subtracting the assumed amount of Kindred’s net debt (adjusted for insurance restructuring-related cash and the SNF divestiture, per Kindred management), the book value of noncontrolling interests and the book value of preferred stock (each as of September 30, 2017 and based on public filings and data from Kindred management) and (ii) dividing such amounts by the fully diluted number of shares of Kindred common stock based on data and calculations provided by Kindred management. Barclays excluded the estimated present value of Kindred’s NOLs from this analysis due to (i) the possibility that the valuation multiples of the selected precedent transactions may have included but not publicly disclosed the value of targets’ NOLs, and (ii) the uncertainty as to whether an acquiror would benefit from and therefore value Kindred’s NOLs in a transaction. The following summarizes the result of these calculations:

Barclays noted that on the basis of the selected precedent transaction analysis, the consideration of $9.00 per share was above the range of implied values per share calculated including home health and LTAC adjustments and within the range of implied values per share calculated excluding home health and LTAC adjustments.

Selected Comparable Company Analysis

In order to assess how the public market values shares of similar publicly traded companies and to provide a range of relative implied equity values per share of Kindred by reference to those companies, Barclays reviewed and compared specific financial and operating data relating to Kindred with selected companies that Barclays, based on its experience with companies in the post-acute care industry, deemed comparable to Kindred. Barclays categorized the selected companies into two different groups, which it referred to as homecare and facility-based care, in order to evaluate and compare those groups to Kindred’s respective home and facility-based lines of business.

The selected homecare comparable companies with respect to Kindred were:

The selected facility-based care comparable companies with respect to Kindred were:

78

Barclays calculated and compared various financial multiples and ratios of Kindred and the selected comparable companies. As part of its selected comparable company analysis, Barclays calculated and analyzed each company’s ratio of its enterprise value to its EBITDA (“EV to EBITDA multiple”). The enterprise value of each company was obtained by adding its net debt to the sum of the market value of its common equity, the book value of any noncontrolling interests, and, in the case of Kindred, the book value of any preferred stock. Where applicable, the EV to EBITDA multiples were adjusted (“EV to EBITDA multiples, as adjusted”) to account for stock-based compensation, noncontrolling interests, certain events such as legal settlements and mergers and acquisitions, and in the case of Kindred, per Kindred management and public filings, hurricane impacts, reductions in corporate overhead, insurance restructuring-related cash, the SNF divestiture and the closure of certain LTAC hospitals. All of these calculations were performed and based on the Kindred projections and publicly available financial data (including public filings, Wall Street research and FactSet) and closing prices, as of the unaffected date. The high and low EV to EBITDA multiples, as adjusted for calendar year 2018 observed for the selected comparable companies were as follows:

Homecare Comparable Companies

Facility-Based Care Comparable Companies

Barclays selected the comparable companies listed above because of similarities in one or more business, financial or operating characteristics with Kindred. However, because no selected comparable company is exactly the same as Kindred, Barclays believed that it was inappropriate to, and therefore did not, rely solely on the quantitative results of the selected comparable company analysis. Accordingly, Barclays also made qualitative judgments concerning differences between the business, financial and operating characteristics and prospects of Kindred and the selected comparable companies that could affect the public trading values of each in order to provide a context in which to consider the results of the quantitative analysis. These qualitative judgments related primarily to the differing sizes, growth prospects, profitability levels and degree of operational and financial risk between Kindred and the companies included in the selected comparable company analysis.

Based upon these judgments and the weighting of profitability from each business line, Barclays selected a range of 7.25x to 9.50x 2018 EV to EBITDA multiples for Kindred and applied such range to Kindred’s projected 2018 EBITDA of $515 million, based on the Kindred projections, to calculate a range of enterprise values for Kindred. Barclays then calculated a range of implied prices per share of Kindred common stock by (i) subtracting the assumed amount of Kindred’s net debt (adjusted for insurance restructuring-related cash and the SNF divestiture, per Kindred management), the book value of noncontrolling interests and the book value of preferred stock (each as of September 30, 2017 and based on public filings and data from Kindred management), (ii) adding to such amount the estimated present value of the net operating loss carryforwards of Kindred based on the NOL projections and calculated utilizing a discount rate of 9.0%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and (iii) dividing such amount

79

by the fully diluted number of shares of Kindred common stock based on data and calculations provided by Kindred management. The following summarizes the result of these calculations:

Barclays noted that on the basis of the selected comparable company analysis, the consideration of $9.00 per share was within the range of implied values per share calculated using the Kindred projections and NOL projections.

Other Factors

Barclays also reviewed and considered other factors, which were not considered part of its financial analyses in connection with rendering its opinion, but were references for informational purposes, including, among other things, the Illustrative Potential Separation Costs, Historical Share Price Analysis, Research Price Targets Analysis, Illustrative Future Share Price Analysis and certain Illustrative Sensitivity Analyses described below.

Illustrative Potential Separation Costs

Based upon data from Kindred management and Bloomberg, Barclays also reviewed and estimated the illustrative potential costs that could arise upon a hypothetical separation of Kindred into two or more distinct businesses. In order to estimate such costs, Barclays calculated the sum of (i) make-whole costs on Kindred’s existing debt, per Bloomberg, assuming such debt was redeemed on June 30, 2018, (ii) estimated fees and expenses related to issuing new debt financing, (iii) taxes on gains in excess of Kindred’s NOLs arising from a separation of the Kindred at Home business, based on data from Kindred management, (iv) an assumed $40 million of annual pre-tax earnings dis-synergies, per Kindred management, valued at a range of EV to EBITDA multiples from 7.25x to 9.50x, the range described above in “— Selected Comparable Company Analysis” and (v) certain other one-time transaction costs. Barclays then calculated a range of implied values per share of Kindred common stock by dividing such amount by the fully diluted number of shares of Kindred common stock based on data and calculations provided by Kindred management. Barclays estimated such illustrative potential separation costs could amount to $5.00 to $6.64 per share of Kindred common stock. Such illustrative potential separation costs were estimated for illustrative purposes only and were not incorporated into Barclays’ other financial analyses described in this section, “Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors — Opinion of Barclays”.

Historical Share Price Analysis

To evaluate the trend in the historical trading prices of Kindred common stock, Barclays considered historical data with regard to the trading prices of Kindred common stock for the period from December 16, 2016 to the unaffected date. Barclays noted that during the period from December 16, 2016 to the unaffected date, the closing price of Kindred common stock ranged from $5.60 to $11.70.

Research Price Targets Analysis

Barclays considered publicly available forward price targets for shares of Kindred common stock prepared and published by select equity research firms as of the unaffected date, the last trading day prior to news reports of a potential transaction between Kindred and TPG, WCAS and Humana. The price targets published by the equity research firms do not necessarily reflect current market trading prices for Kindred common stock and these estimates are subject to uncertainties, including the future financial performance of Kindred and future financial market conditions. Barclays noted that the range of low to high forward share price targets as of the

80

unaffected date was $7.00 to $11.00 per share of Kindred common stock. Utilizing a discount rate of 10.0%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of equity for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Barclays then derived a range of implied present values per share for Kindred by discounting to present value the range of low to high forward share price targets referenced above, which resulted in a range of $6.36 to $10.00 per share of Kindred common stock.

Illustrative Future Share Price Analysis

Barclays performed an illustrative analysis of the implied present value of an illustrative future value per share of Kindred common stock, which is designed to provide an indication of the present value of a theoretical future value of a company’s equity as a function of such company’s financial projections and valuation multiples. Barclays first calculated the implied future enterprise values of Kindred one, two and three years from the valuation date by applying ratios of Kindred’s (i) adjusted enterprise value, calculated as Kindred’s (a) enterprise value plus (b) rent expense multiplied by 8.0x in accordance with industry convention, to its (ii) earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and rent expense (“EBITDAR,” and such multiples, “Adjusted EV to EBITDAR multiples”) ranging from 7.0x to 8.0x to EBITDAR estimates for Kindred as reflected in the Kindred projections for each of the fiscal years 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively, and then subtracting from such amounts Kindred’s projected rent expense at each respective valuation date multiplied by 8.0x. The illustrative Adjusted EV to EBITDAR multiple estimates were derived by Barclays utilizing its professional judgment and experience, taking into account current and historical trading data, equity research target price multiples and Adjusted EV to EBITDAR multiples for Kindred as of the unaffected date. Barclays then calculated a range of implied prices per share of Kindred common stock by (i) subtracting the projected amount of Kindred’s net debt and the book value of noncontrolling interests (each as of September 30, 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively, as reflected in the Kindred projections), (ii) adding to such amount the estimated remaining present value of the net operating loss carryforwards of Kindred at each date based on the NOL projections and calculated utilizing a discount rate of 9.0%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model and (iii) dividing such amount by the fully diluted number of shares of Kindred common stock based on data and calculations provided by Kindred management. Barclays utilized Adjusted EV to EBITDAR multiples in this analysis because it noted that many equity research analysts utilized such a methodology to derive their price targets for Kindred.

Utilizing a discount rate of 10.0%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of equity for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Barclays then derived a range of implied present values per share for Kindred by discounting to present value, the implied future values per share of Kindred as a stand-alone entity. The following tables present the results of the analysis of the implied present value of the illustrative future value per share of Kindred common stock.

Present Value of Illustrative Future Share Prices

Illustrative Sensitivity Analyses

At the instruction of Kindred, Barclays’ opinion and the financial analyses Barclays performed in connection with rendering its opinion did not take into account any changes to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017, or any other potential effects that may result from changes to U.S. tax law in effect as of December 18, 2017, including changes in market valuation of Kindred or any other companies, interest rates and government healthcare reimbursement rates under Medicare, Medicaid or other applicable government programs. At the instruction of Kindred, in addition to the financial analyses Barclays performed in connection with

81

rendering its opinion, Barclays performed certain illustrative sensitivity analyses relating to certain potential changes to federal corporate tax rates and limitations on the deductibility of interest expenses, as well as reductions in Medicare reimbursement rates for illustrative purposes only. At the direction of Kindred, the sensitivity analyses reflected the Kindred projections as adjusted to reflect a 21% federal corporate tax rate, interest deduction capped at 30% of EBITDA through 2021 and at 30% of EBIT thereafter, non-deductible interested carried forward and a hypothetical 1% reduction in Medicare reimbursement rates to reflect the possibility, per Kindred management, that Medicare spending by the U.S. government might be reduced in order to offset all or a portion of any lost revenue arising from tax reform, incremental to any rate cuts or increases reflected in the Kindred projections, beginning in 2021 (the “Kindred tax sensitivity projections”).

Illustrative Discounted Cash Flow Sensitivity Analysis

Using the same methodology and assumptions described above in “— Discounted Cash Flow Analysis”, except that Barclays used the Kindred tax sensitivity projections and discount rates ranging from 9.0% to 9.5%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Barclays derived a range of implied present values per share of Kindred common stock. The following summarizes the result of these calculations:

Implied Equity Value Per Share Reference Range

Illustrative Future Share Price Sensitivity Analysis

Using the same method described above in “— Illustrative Future Share Price Analysis”, except that Barclays used the Kindred tax sensitivity projections, a discount rate of 10.5%, reflecting an estimate of the cost of equity for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, and a discount rate of 9.25% with respect to the net operating losses, reflecting an estimate of the cost of capital for Kindred and derived by application of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Barclays derived a range of implied present values per share of Kindred common stock. The following summarizes the result of these calculations:

Implied Present Value of Illustrative Future Share Price

General

Barclays is an internationally recognized investment banking firm and, as part of its investment banking activities, is regularly engaged in the valuation of businesses and their securities in connection with mergers and acquisitions, investments for passive and control purposes, negotiated underwritings, competitive bids, secondary distributions of listed and unlisted securities, private placements and valuations for estate, corporate and other purposes. The Board selected Barclays because of its familiarity with Kindred and its qualifications, reputation and experience in the valuation of businesses and securities in connection with mergers and acquisitions generally, as well as substantial experience in transactions comparable to the merger.

82

Barclays is acting as financial advisor to Kindred in connection with the merger. Pursuant to an engagement letter between Kindred and Barclays, Kindred has agreed to pay Barclays a transaction fee of $17.5 million, $2.5 million of which was paid following the delivery of the Barclays opinion, and the remainder of which is contingent upon consummation of the merger. The opinion fee was not contingent upon the conclusion of Barclays’ opinion or the consummation of the merger. In addition, Kindred has agreed to reimburse Barclays for its reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with the proposed transaction and to indemnify Barclays for certain liabilities that may arise out of its engagement by Kindred and the rendering of Barclays’ opinion. Barclays and its affiliates have performed various investment banking and financial services for Kindred and its affiliates in the past, and expect to perform such services in the future, and have received, and expect to receive, customary fees for such services. Specifically, in the past two years, Barclays and its affiliates have performed the following investment banking and financial services for Kindred: (i) having acted as a lender under Kindred’s existing credit facilities; and (ii) having executed certain derivative transactions for Kindred and its affiliates. During the two-year period ended December 18, 2017, Barclays has received compensation for investment banking and financial services provided by its investment banking division to Kindred and/or certain of its affiliates of approximately $100,000.

In addition, Barclays and its affiliates have performed various investment banking and financial services for Humana and its affiliates in the past, and expect to perform such services in the future, and have received, and expect to receive, customary fees for such services. Specifically, in the past two years, Barclays and its affiliates have performed the following investment banking and financial services for Humana: (i) having acted as a co-manager on an $800 million senior notes offering by Humana in December 2017; and (ii) having acted as a co-manager on a credit facility origination and bond issuance by Humana. During the two-year period ended December 18, 2017, Barclays has received compensation for investment banking and financial services provided by its investment banking division to Humana and/or certain of its affiliates of approximately $200,000.

In addition, Barclays and its affiliates in the past have provided, currently are providing, or in the future may provide, investment banking services to TPG and WCAS and certain of their respective portfolio companies and affiliates, and Barclays and its affiliates have received or in the future expect to receive customary fees for rendering such services, including (i) having acted or acting as financial advisor to TPG and WCAS and certain of their respective portfolio companies and affiliates in connection with certain mergers and acquisition transactions; (ii) having acted or acting as arranger, bookrunner and/or lender for TPG and WCAS and certain of their respective portfolio companies and affiliates in connection with various financing transactions; (iii) having acted or acting as underwriter, initial purchaser and placement agent for various equity and debt offerings undertaken by TPG and WCAS and certain of their respective portfolio companies and affiliates; and (iv) having executed certain derivative transactions for TPG and WCAS and certain of their respective portfolio companies and affiliates. During the two-year period ended December 18, 2017, Barclays has received compensation for investment banking and financial services provided by its investment banking division to TPG and/or certain of its portfolio companies and affiliates of approximately $24.4 million. During the two-year period ended December 18, 2017, Barclays has received compensation for investment banking and financial services provided by its investment banking division to WCAS and/or certain of its portfolio companies and affiliates of approximately $9.6 million.

Barclays and its affiliates engage in a wide range of businesses from investment and commercial banking, lending, asset management and other financial and non-financial services. In the ordinary course of its business, Barclays and its affiliates may actively trade and effect transactions in the equity, debt and/or other securities (and any derivatives thereof) and financial instruments (including loans and other obligations) of Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent, Humana, TPG, WCAS and their respective affiliates for their own account and for the accounts of their customers and, accordingly, may, at any time, hold long or short positions and investments in such securities and financial instruments.

83

Opinion of Guggenheim Securities

Overview

Kindred engaged Guggenheim Securities to act as its financial advisor in connection with Kindred’s consideration of strategic alternatives, including the merger. In selecting Guggenheim Securities as its financial advisor, Kindred’s board of directors considered, among other things, Guggenheim Securities’ reputation and experience as an investment banking firm, its knowledge of the healthcare services industry generally and Kindred’s business and operations, and its other capabilities and strengths. Guggenheim Securities, as part of its investment banking, financial advisory and capital markets businesses, is regularly engaged in the valuation and financial assessment of businesses and securities in connection with mergers and acquisitions, recapitalizations, spin-offs/split-offs, restructurings, securities offerings in both the private and public capital markets and valuations for corporate and other purposes.

At the December 18, 2017 meeting of the Board, Guggenheim Securities rendered an oral opinion, which was confirmed by delivery of a written opinion dated December 19, 2017, to the Board to the effect that, as of such date and based on and subject to the matters considered, the procedures followed, the assumptions made and various limitations of and qualifications to the review undertaken, the merger consideration was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares).

This description of Guggenheim Securities’ opinion is qualified in its entirety by the full text of the written opinion, which is attached as Annex D to this proxy statement. Guggenheim Securities’ written opinion sets forth the matters considered, the procedures followed, the assumptions made and various limitations of and qualifications to the review undertaken by Guggenheim Securities. Guggenheim Securities’ written opinion, which was authorized for issuance by the Fairness Opinion and Valuation Committee of Guggenheim Securities, is necessarily based on economic, capital markets and other conditions, and the information made available to Guggenheim Securities, as of the date of such opinion. Kindred encourages you to read the opinion carefully in its entirety. Guggenheim Securities has no responsibility for updating or revising its opinion based on facts, circumstances or events occurring after the date of the rendering of the opinion.

In reading the discussion of Guggenheim Securities’ opinion set forth below, you should be aware that such opinion (and, as applicable, any materials provided in connection therewith):

84

In the course of performing its reviews and analyses for rendering its opinion, Guggenheim Securities:

With respect to the information used in arriving at its opinion, Guggenheim Securities noted that:

85

Guggenheim Securities also noted certain other considerations with respect to its engagement and the rendering of its opinion:

86

Summary of Financial Analyses

Overview of Financial Analyses

This “Summary of Financial Analyses” presents a summary of the principal financial analyses performed by Guggenheim Securities and presented to the Board in connection with Guggenheim Securities’ rendering of its opinion. Such presentation to the Board was supplemented by Guggenheim Securities’ oral discussion, the nature and substance of which may not be fully described herein.

Some of the financial analyses summarized below include summary data and information presented in tabular format. In order to understand fully such financial analyses, the summary data and tables must be read together with the full text of the summary. Considering the summary data and tables alone could create a misleading or incomplete view of Guggenheim Securities’ financial analyses.

The preparation of a fairness opinion is a complex process and involves various judgments and determinations as to the most appropriate and relevant financial analyses and the application of those methods to the particular circumstances involved. A fairness opinion therefore is not readily susceptible to partial analysis or summary description, and taking portions of the financial analyses set forth below, without considering such analyses as a whole, would in Guggenheim Securities’ view create an incomplete and misleading picture of the processes underlying the financial analyses considered in rendering Guggenheim Securities’ opinion.

In arriving at its opinion, Guggenheim Securities:

87

With respect to the financial analyses performed by Guggenheim Securities in connection with rendering its opinion:

Certain Definitions

Throughout this “Summary of Financial Analyses,” the following financial terms are used in connection with Guggenheim Securities’ various financial analyses:

88

Recap of Implied Merger Financial Metrics

Based on the merger consideration of $9.00 per share in cash, Guggenheim Securities calculated various implied merger-related premia and multiples as outlined in the table below:

Merger Premia and Implied Merger Multiples

Change-of-Control Financial Analyses

Recap of Change-of-Control Financial Analyses. In evaluating Kindred in connection with rendering its opinion, Guggenheim Securities performed various financial analyses which are summarized in the table below and described in more detail elsewhere herein, including discounted cash flow analyses based on the Kindred projections, selected precedent merger and acquisition transactions analysis and selected publicly traded companies analysis. Solely for informational reference purposes, Guggenheim Securities also (i) performed discounted cash flow analyses based on the Kindred projections, as adjusted by Kindred senior management for the expected tax rate under the Tax Bill, and as further adjusted by Kindred senior management for an illustrative potential negative impact on Medicare reimbursement arising from the Tax Bill, and (iii) reviewed the historical trading price range and Wall Street equity research analysts’ price targets for Kindred common stock.

89

Recap of Change-of-Control Financial Analyses

Discounted Cash Flow Analyses (Kindred Projections). Guggenheim Securities performed illustrative stand-alone discounted cash flow analyses of Kindred based on projected after-tax unlevered free cash flows for Kindred and an estimate of its terminal/continuing value at the end of the projection horizon, based on the Kindred projections. In performing its illustrative discounted cash flow analyses:

90

Selected Precedent Merger and Acquisition Transactions Analysis. Guggenheim Securities reviewed and analyzed certain financial metrics associated with certain selected precedent merger and acquisition transactions involving companies in the specialty hospital sector and the homecare sector that Guggenheim Securities deemed relevant for purposes of this analysis. The following 13 precedent merger and acquisition transactions were selected by Guggenheim Securities for purposes of this analysis, of which two specialty hospital and one homecare transactions were deemed to be most relevant, and of which six specialty hospital and four homecare transactions were deemed to be less relevant and were selected for reference purposes only, in each case based on the professional judgment and experience of Guggenheim Securities. Guggenheim Securities calculated, among other things and to the extent publicly available, certain implied change-of-control transaction EV to LTM EBITDA multiples for the selected precedent merger and acquisition transactions (based on Wall Street equity research consensus estimates, each company’s most recent publicly available financial filings and certain other publicly available information), which are summarized in the table below:

Selected Precedent Merger and Acquisition (M&A) Transactions

In performing its selected precedent merger and acquisition transactions analysis:

91

Selected Publicly Traded Companies Analysis. Guggenheim Securities reviewed and analyzed Kindred’s historical stock price performance, trading metrics and historical and projected/forecasted financial performance compared to corresponding data for certain specialty hospital sector and the homecare sector publicly traded companies that Guggenheim Securities deemed relevant for purposes of this analysis. The following nine publicly traded companies were selected by Guggenheim Securities for purposes of this analysis, of which two specialty hospital and one homecare sector companies were deemed to be most relevant, and of which two specialty hospital and four homecare sector companies were deemed to be less relevant and were selected for reference purposes only, in each case based on the professional judgment and experience of Guggenheim Securities. Guggenheim Securities calculated, among other things, various public market trading multiples for Kindred and the selected publicly traded companies (in the case of the selected publicly traded companies, based on Wall Street equity research consensus estimates and each company’s most recent publicly available financial filings), which are summarized in the table below:

Selected Publicly Traded Company Multiples

In performing its selected publicly traded companies analysis:

92

Other Financial Reviews and Analyses Solely for Informational Reference Purposes

In order to provide certain context for the financial analyses in connection with its opinion as described above, Guggenheim Securities undertook various additional financial reviews and analyses, as summarized below, solely for informational reference purposes. As a general matter, Guggenheim Securities did not consider such additional financial reviews and analyses to be determinative methodologies for purposes of its opinion.

Illustrative Discounted Cash Flow Analyses (Tax Bill Cases). Guggenheim Securities performed illustrative stand-alone discounted cash flow analyses of Kindred based on projected after-tax unlevered free cash flows for Kindred and an estimate of its terminal/continuing value at the end of the projection horizon, based on the Kindred projections, as adjusted by Kindred’s senior management for illustrative purposes (i) to reflect the then-expected tax rates under the Tax Bill (the “Tax Rate Adjustment”) and (ii) to reflect both the Tax Rate Adjustment and an illustrative 1% reduction in Medicare revenue arising from the Tax Bill (the “Tax Rate Adjustment and Medicare Adjustment”). In performing its illustrative discounted cash flow analyses:

Stock Price Trading History and Wall Street Equity Research Analyst Stock Price Targets. Guggenheim Securities reviewed Kindred’s 52 week stock price trading history and selected Wall Street equity research analyst forward stock price targets for Kindred as of December 15, 2017 (the last trading day prior to news reports of a potential transaction between Kindred and TPG, WCAS and Humana):

Other Considerations

Except as described in the summary above, Kindred did not provide specific instructions to, or place any limitations on, Guggenheim Securities with respect to the procedures to be followed or factors to be considered in performing its financial analyses or providing its opinion. The type and amount of consideration payable in the merger were determined through negotiations between Kindred and Parent, HospitalCo Parent, Merger Sub and Hospital Merger Sub and were approved by the Board. The decision to enter into the merger agreement was solely that of the Board. Guggenheim Securities’ opinion was just one of the many factors taken into consideration by the Board. Consequently, Guggenheim Securities’ financial analyses should not be viewed as determinative of the decision of the Board with respect to the fairness, from a financial point of view, to the holders of Kindred common stock (other than holders of excluded shares) of the merger consideration.

93

Pursuant to the terms of Guggenheim Securities’ engagement, Kindred has agreed to pay Guggenheim Securities a cash transaction fee of $17.5 million upon consummation of the merger. In connection with Guggenheim Securities’ engagement, Kindred has previously paid Guggenheim Securities a cash milestone fee of $2.5 million that was paid following delivery of Guggenheim Securities’ opinion which will be credited against the foregoing cash transaction fee. In addition, Kindred has agreed to reimburse Guggenheim Securities for certain expenses and to indemnify Guggenheim Securities against certain liabilities arising out of its engagement.

Guggenheim Securities (i) during the past two years has previously been engaged by Kindred and (ii) during the past two years has previously been engaged by TPG or its affiliates, subsidiaries, investment funds or portfolio companies, as applicable, in each case to provide certain financial advisory or investment banking services in connection with matters unrelated to the merger for which Guggenheim Securities has received (or expects to receive) customary fees. Specifically during the past two years, among other matters, Guggenheim Securities has performed the following financial advisory or investment banking services for Kindred and TPG, respectively: (i) acted as financial advisor to Kindred in connection with the SNF divestiture, for which the first in a series of closings occurred in August 2017, (ii) acted as financial advisor to Energy Futures Holdings Corp., a portfolio company of TPG, in connection with its reorganization, (iii) acted as financial advisor to Life Time Fitness Inc., a portfolio company of TPG, in connection with various debt financing transactions, (iv) acted as financial advisor to TPG in connection with its acquisition of Beaver-Visitec International, Inc., which closed in July 2016 and (v) acted as financial advisor to TPG in connection with its sale of Albireo Limited, which closed in November 2016. During the two years ended December 19, 2017, Guggenheim Securities received compensation from Kindred of approximately $10 million for financial advisory and investment banking services unrelated to the merger and received compensation from TPG or its affiliates, subsidiaries, investment funds or portfolio companies, as applicable, of approximately $10 million for financial advisory and investment banking services unrelated to the merger.

Guggenheim Securities has not been previously engaged during the past two years by WCAS, Humana or their respective affiliates, subsidiaries, investment funds or portfolio companies, as applicable, to provide financial advisory or investment banking services for which Guggenheim Securities received fees. Guggenheim Securities may seek to provide Kindred, Parent, HospitalCo Parent, TPG, WCAS or Humana and their respective affiliates with certain financial advisory and investment banking services unrelated to the merger in the future, for which services Guggenheim Securities would expect to receive compensation.

Guggenheim Securities and its affiliates and related entities engage in a wide range of financial services activities for its and their own accounts and the accounts of customers, including but not limited to: asset, investment and wealth management; insurance services; investment banking, corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions and restructuring; merchant banking; fixed income and equity sales, trading and research; and derivatives, foreign exchange and futures. In the ordinary course of these activities, Guggenheim Securities and its affiliates and related entities may (i) provide such financial services to Kindred, TPG, WCAS, Humana, other participants in the proposed transaction and their respective affiliates, investment funds and portfolio companies, as applicable, for which services Guggenheim Securities and its affiliates and related entities may have received, and may in the future receive, compensation and (ii) directly and indirectly hold long and short positions, trade and otherwise conduct such activities in or with respect to loans, debt and equity securities and derivative products of or relating to Kindred, TPG, WCAS, Humana, other participants in the proposed transaction and their respective affiliates, investment funds and portfolio companies, as applicable. Furthermore, Guggenheim Securities and its affiliates and related entities and its or their respective directors, officers, employees, consultants and agents may have investments in Kindred, TPG, WCAS, Humana, other participants in the proposed transaction and their respective affiliates, investment funds and portfolio companies, as applicable.

Consistent with applicable legal and regulatory guidelines, Guggenheim Securities has adopted certain policies and procedures to establish and maintain the independence of its research departments and personnel. As a result, Guggenheim Securities’ research analysts may hold views, make statements or investment

94

recommendations and publish research reports with respect to Kindred, TPG, WCAS, Humana, other participants in the proposed transaction and their respective affiliates, investment funds and portfolio companies, as applicable, and the proposed transaction that differ from the views of Guggenheim Securities’ investment banking personnel.

Certain Unaudited Prospective Financial Information

In connection with Kindred’s consideration of strategic alternatives, Kindred’s management prepared and provided to the Board and to Barclays and Guggenheim Securities certain prospective financial information. The prospective financial information most recently provided to the Board and Barclays and Guggenheim Securities before the Board approved and Kindred executed the merger agreement (the “Projections”) is set forth below.

The Projections were approved by the Board for each of Barclays’ and Guggenheim Securities’ use for purposes of their respective financial analyses, as summarized under “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors” beginning on page [●].

The Projections were not prepared with a view to public disclosure and are included in this proxy statement only because such information was made available to the Board for purposes of considering and evaluating Kindred’s strategic alternatives, including the merger, and to Barclays and Guggenheim Securities for purposes of their respective financial analyses and opinions summarized under “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Opinion of Kindred’s Financial Advisors” beginning on page [●]. The Projections were not prepared with a view to compliance with generally accepted accounting principles as applied in the United States (“GAAP”), the published guidelines of the SEC regarding projections and forward-looking statements or the guidelines established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants for preparation and presentation of prospective financial information. Furthermore, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, has not examined, reviewed, compiled or otherwise applied procedures to the Projections and, accordingly, assumes no responsibility for, and expresses no opinion on, the Projections. The Projections included in this proxy statement have been prepared by, and are the responsibility of, Kindred and its management. The Projections were prepared solely for the use of the Board, Barclays and Guggenheim Securities and are subjective in many respects.

Although this summary of the Projections is presented with numerical specificity, the projections reflect numerous variables, assumptions and estimates as to future events made by our management that our management believed were reasonable at the time the Projections were prepared, taking into account the relevant information available to our management at the time. However, such variables, assumptions and estimates are inherently uncertain and many of which are beyond the control of our management. Because the Projections cover multiple years, by their nature, they become subject to greater uncertainty with each successive year. This information is not fact and should not be relied upon as being necessarily indicative of actual future results. The Projections are forward-looking statements. Important factors that may affect actual results and cause the Projections not to be achieved include, but are not limited to, risks and uncertainties relating to our business, general business, economic and regulatory conditions, changes in tax laws, our reliance on reimbursement by third-party payors and other factors described or referenced under “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” beginning on page [●]. In addition, the Projections do not take into account any

95

circumstances or events occurring after the date that they were prepared and do not give effect to the merger. As a result, there can be no assurance that the Projections will be realized, and actual results may be materially better or worse than those contained in the Projections. The inclusion of this information should not be regarded as an indication that the Board, Kindred, Barclays, Guggenheim Securities or any other recipient of this information considered, or now considers, the Projections to be predictive of actual future results. The summary of the Projections is not included in this proxy statement in order to induce any stockholder to vote in favor of the merger proposal or any of the other proposals to be voted on at the special meeting.

Except to the extent required by applicable federal securities laws, we do not intend, and expressly disclaim any responsibility, to update or otherwise revise the Projections to reflect circumstances existing after the date when Kindred prepared the Projections or to reflect the occurrence of future events or changes in general economic or industry conditions, even in the event that any of the assumptions underlying the Projections are shown to be in error. By including in this proxy statement a summary of the Projections, neither Kindred nor any of its representatives or advisors (including Barclays and Guggenheim Securities) nor Parent, HospitalCo Parent, Merger Sub, TPG, WCAS, PSPIB, Humana or any of their respective representatives or affiliates makes any representation to any person regarding the ultimate performance of Kindred, the surviving entity or the surviving entity in the hospital merger compared to the information contained in such financial forecasts and should not be read to do so.

Certain of the measures included in the Projections may be considered non-GAAP financial measures. Non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for or superior to, financial information presented in compliance with GAAP, and non-GAAP financial measures as used by Kindred may not be comparable to similarly titled amounts used by other companies.

Interests of Kindred’s Executive Officers and Directors in the Merger

In considering the recommendation of the Board that you vote to approve the merger proposal, you should be aware that, aside from their interests as Kindred stockholders, Kindred’s directors and executive officers have interests in the merger that are different from, or in addition to, the interests of Kindred stockholders generally, which may create potential conflicts of interest. These interests are described in more detail below, and with respect to the named executive officers of Kindred, are quantified in the “Golden Parachute Compensation” table below. The Board was aware of these interests and considered them when it adopted the merger agreement and approved the merger.

Kindred’s current executive officers are: Benjamin A. Breier, President and Chief Executive Officer; Kent H. Wallace, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer; Stephen D. Farber, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; David A. Causby, Executive Vice President and President, Kindred at Home; Peter K. Kalmey, President, Hospital Division; Jason Zachariah, President, Kindred Rehabilitation Services; William M. Altman, Executive Vice President, Strategy and Chief of Staff; Joseph L. Landenwich, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary; and Stephen R. Cunanan, Chief Administrative Officer and Chief People Officer.

Treatment of Director and Executive Officer Common Stock

As is the case for any stockholder of Kindred, Kindred’s directors and executive officers will be entitled to receive $9.00 in cash, without interest, and subject to any applicable withholding taxes, for each share of Kindred common stock that they own at the effective time. For information regarding beneficial ownership of Kindred common stock by each of Kindred’s current directors, Kindred’s named executive officers and all directors and executive officers as a group, see the section entitled “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” beginning on page [●].

96

Treatment of Director and Executive Officer Equity Awards

As described under “The Merger Agreement — Treatment of Kindred Equity Awards” beginning on page [●], the merger agreement provides that each Kindred option and each Kindred stock award will be treated as set forth below.

Stock Options. Each Kindred option held by Kindred’s directors and executive officers that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time, whether or not then vested or exercisable, will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive an amount in cash equal to the excess, if any, of the merger consideration over the exercise price of such option, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. Any Kindred option that has an exercise price that is equal to or greater than the merger consideration will be cancelled without consideration.

Other Stock Awards. Each Kindred stock award held by Kindred’s directors and executive officers that is outstanding and vested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. As of the date hereof, Mr. Diaz is the only director who holds performance stock units in respect of Kindred common stock (“PSUs”), which are legacy awards granted to him pursuant to his prior employment agreement that governed his transition from Chief Executive Officer of Kindred to Executive Vice Chairman of the Board. All of Mr. Diaz’s outstanding PSUs are expected to vest prior to the effective time.

Each Kindred stock award held by Kindred’s directors that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be cancelled and converted into the right to receive, promptly following the effective time, an amount in cash equal to the product of (i) the aggregate number of shares of Kindred common stock in respect of such Kindred stock award multiplied by (ii) the merger consideration, subject to any applicable withholding taxes. For purposes of this cancellation and conversion of unvested Kindred stock awards, each such Kindred stock award subject to performance-based vesting conditions shall be deemed earned at the target performance level. We expect that all unvested stock awards held by Kindred directors will vest according to their terms prior to the effective time.

Each Kindred stock award held by Kindred’s executive officers that is outstanding and unvested as of immediately prior to the effective time will be converted into a replacement cash award for an amount equal to the product of (x) the merger consideration and (y) the number of shares of Kindred common stock to which such Kindred stock award relates (as determined in accordance herewith). Each replacement cash award will be subject to the same terms and conditions applicable to the Kindred stock award immediately prior to the effective time (including service-based vesting on the original vesting schedule and payment on the originally scheduled vesting date of such award), except that (i) any performance-based conditions to which such Kindred stock award was subject shall be deemed earned at the target performance level so that the replacement cash award shall be subject to service-based vesting only and (ii) if such executive officer’s employment is terminated by Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent or their respective affiliates, as applicable, without “cause” or by such executive officer for “good reason” during the service-based vesting period applicable to such executive officer’s replacement cash award, such replacement cash award shall vest and become payable in full as of the date of such termination.

Payments for Unvested Equity Awards

The following table sets forth the amounts that each Kindred director, named executive officer and all other executive officers as a group would receive with respect to unvested Kindred stock awards, which include restricted shares of Kindred common stock (“restricted stock”) and PSUs, pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement and the per share merger consideration of $9.00 and assuming the completion of the merger occurred on May 31, 2018 and that the executive officers are terminated without “cause” or for “good reason”

97

immediately following the completion of the merger. The actual amounts payable may differ and will depend on whether such executive officers are actually terminated, the date of termination, the manner of the termination and the terms of the agreements in effect at such time. If the executive officers are not terminated in connection with the closing of the merger, it is anticipated that their unvested equity awards would be converted into replacement cash awards that remain outstanding and subject to service-based vesting, as described above, In addition, certain executive officers may be given the opportunity to convert a portion of his current equity interests into equity interests of Parent or HospitalCo Parent (or their respective affiliates) rather than receive cash, as further described below. The numbers set forth below do not attempt to forecast any grants, additional issuances, dividends, additional deferrals or forfeitures of equity-based awards following the date of this proxy statement. Depending on when the effective date occurs, certain equity-based awards shown in the table below may vest in accordance with their terms.

Estimated Payments for Unvested Equity Awards Table

98

Treatment of LTIP Performance Cash Awards

With respect to each LTIP performance cash award held by Kindred’s executive officers that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time, the portion of such LTIP performance cash award payable in respect of each performance period that has not yet been completed prior to the effective time (“open performance periods”) will be converted into a replacement service-based LTIP cash award (“replacement LTIP cash award”) that will be subject to the same terms and conditions applicable to the LTIP performance cash award immediately prior to the effective time (including vesting on the original vesting schedule and payment on the originally scheduled vesting date of such LTIP performance cash award), except that (i) any performance-based conditions to which such LTIP performance cash award was subject shall be deemed earned at the target performance level so that the replacement LTIP cash award shall be subject to service-based vesting only and (ii) if the employment of such holder of the replacement LTIP cash award is terminated by Kindred, HospitalCo Parent, Parent or their respective affiliates, as applicable, without “cause” or by such holder for “good reason” during the service-based vesting period applicable to such holder’s replacement LTIP cash award, such replacement LTIP cash award shall vest and become payable in full as of the date of such termination.

With respect to each LTIP performance cash award held by Kindred’s executive officers that is outstanding immediately prior to the effective time, the portion of such LTIP performance cash award payable in respect of each performance period that has been completed prior to the effective time (“closed performance periods”) will be accelerated and cancelled in consideration for a cash payment equal to the award amount based on actual performance for the applicable closed performance period, as determined by the Executive Compensation Committee of Kindred’s Board in the ordinary course.

For purposes of determining the performance period applicable to the treatment of LTIP performance cash award, any obligation of continued services through the scheduled payment date thereof and any adjustment that may otherwise have been required to be made based on a total stockholder return or other similar performance measure shall be disregarded.

Change in Control Severance Agreements

Each Kindred executive officer, including each named executive officer, is party to a change in control severance agreement with Kindred (or a subsidiary thereof), pursuant to which the executive officer is entitled to certain payments and benefits upon a termination without “cause” or a resignation for “good reason” (each, as defined in the respective change in control severance agreement) within two years following the completion of a “change in control,” as defined in the change in control agreement, which the merger will constitute. These benefits are in lieu of any other severance benefits to which our executive officers may be entitled, including under their employment agreements, and are subject to the executive officer executing and not revoking a general release of claims within 60 days following such qualifying termination.

The term “good reason” is generally defined in all of our change in control severance agreements with our executive officers to mean (i) the executive officer’s title, duties, responsibilities or authority is reduced or diminished without such executive officer’s written consent, (ii) the executive officer’s compensation is reduced, (iii) the executive officer’s benefits are reduced, other than pursuant to a uniform reduction applicable to all managers of Kindred, or (iv) the executive officer is asked to relocate such executive officer’s office to a place more than 30 miles from its location on a change in control date.

The term “cause” is generally defined in all of our change in control severance agreements with our executive officers to mean an executive officer’s (i) conviction of or plea of nolo contendere to a crime involving moral turpitude or (ii) willful and material breach of such executive officer’s duties and responsibilities, which is committed in bad faith or without reasonable belief that such conduct is in the best interests of Kindred and its affiliates. The agreements also specify the process that must be followed for Kindred to terminate an executive for “cause.”

99

The benefits to be afforded the executive officers under these change in control severance agreements include: (i) a lump sum cash severance payment equal to three times (or 2.99 times with respect to Mr. Wallace and 2.9 times with respect to Messrs. Causby, Zachariah and Kalmey) base salary and short-term incentive target award as of the termination of employment or change in control date, whichever is greater; (ii) continuation of health, dental, life and disability insurance coverage for three years; and (iii) for Messrs. Breier, Farber, Landenwich, Altman and Cunanan, reimbursement of up to $5,000 for legal and accounting fees incurred as a result of the change in control and receipt of the computer such executive officer is using as of the date of termination.

Each change in control severance agreement also contains a non-solicitation covenant which provides that for a one-year period after such executive officer’s termination of employment, he will not aid, endeavor to solicit or induce any of Kindred’s or its affiliates’ employees to leave their employment with Kindred or such affiliate in order to accept employment with the executive officer or any other person or entity.

In addition to these non-solicitation covenants, Messrs. Breier, Causby and Zachariah are each subject to a 12-month post-termination covenant not to compete pursuant to their employment agreements with the Company, which may be modified from time to time. Other executive officers may enter into covenants not to compete from time to time.

For an estimate of the amounts that would become payable to each of Kindred’s named executive officers if a qualifying termination of employment were to occur immediately following consummation of the merger, see “— Potential Merger-Related Payments to Named Executive Officers” below.

Indemnification and Insurance

Under the merger agreement, each present and former director and officer of Kindred will have rights to indemnification and expense advancement from Parent, HospitalCo Parent, the surviving entity and the surviving entity in the hospital merger, and Parent and HospitalCo Parent have agreed to cause the surviving entity and the surviving entity in the hospital merger to maintain directors’ and officers’ insurance policies or purchase tail coverage, in each case for a six year period. See “The Merger Agreement — Directors’ and Officers’ Indemnification and Insurance” beginning on page [●].

Continuation of Employee Compensation and Benefit Levels

Under the merger agreement, for a period commencing at the effective time and ending on the date that is the earlier of (x) 12 months following the effective time and (y) the date of termination of each continuing employee’s (as defined below) employment with Parent, HospitalCo Parent or their subsidiaries, as applicable, Parent and HospitalCo Parent have agreed to provide (or to cause the applicable subsidiary to provide) to each employee of Kindred or its subsidiaries, including our executive officers, who continue to be employed by Kindred, Parent, HospitalCo Parent or any of their subsidiaries immediately following the closing date (“continuing employees”) with (i) a base salary and target bonus opportunity that are, in each case, no less favorable than the base salary and target bonus opportunity provided to such continuing employee immediately prior to the effective time and (ii) employee benefits that are, in the aggregate, substantially comparable to the employee benefits provided to such continuing employee immediately prior to the effective time (in the case of each of clauses (i) and (ii), excluding long-term cash-based or equity-based compensation and transaction-based compensation), and provided that in the event of a conflict with respect to the terms and conditions of employment of a continuing employee between the merger agreement benefit continuation provisions and the provisions of any collective bargaining agreement, the terms and conditions of such collective bargaining agreement shall control.

100

Agreements with HospitalCo Parent and Parent

As of the date of this proxy statement, it is anticipated that, following the closing, Mr. Breier will continue as Chief Executive Officer of Kindred and Mr. Causby will serve as Chief Executive Officer of Parent (which will operate the Homecare Business). Each of Mr. Breier and Mr. Causby has entered into a non-binding term sheet with HospitalCo Parent and Parent (which will operate the Homecare Business), respectively, and is continuing to negotiate the principal terms and conditions of employment that would apply to Mr. Breier’s and Mr. Causby’s post-closing services, including the potential requirement that Mr. Breier and Mr. Causby convert a portion of his current equity interests into, or otherwise make a cash investment into, HospitalCo Parent or Parent (or their respective affiliates). Though Mr. Breier and Mr. Causby currently expect to enter into definitive agreements with respect to their future employment, there is no assurance that they will reach mutually acceptable agreements with HospitalCo Parent or Parent regarding such employment. Any new definitive agreements entered into by Mr. Breier or Mr. Causby with respect to such employment would not become effective until completion of the merger and would be expected to supersede the change in control severance agreements for each such executive officer, except as otherwise set forth in such definitive agreements.

With regard to the Company’s other executive officers, Parent and HospitalCo Parent have indicated that they or their respective affiliates may pursue agreements, arrangements or understandings regarding terms and conditions of future employment. As a result, prior to the effective time of the merger, Parent and HospitalCo Parent may initiate negotiations with such executive officers and may enter into definitive agreements, though there is no assurance that any such negotiations or definitive agreements will be entered into or as to what the terms of such agreements will be. Any such agreements would not become effective until completion of the merger.

101

Potential Merger-Related Payments to Named Executive Officers

The following table sets forth the information required by Item 402(t) of Regulation S-K regarding the compensation for Kindred’s named executive officers based on the merger, assuming that the merger was completed on May 31, 2018, and that the named executive officers are terminated without “cause” or for “good reason” immediately following the completion of the merger. The disclosure rules require us to provide disclosure assuming that each named executive officer has a qualifying termination in connection with the completion of the merger and, as a result, is entitled to receive his change in control severance payments and benefits. The actual amounts payable may differ and will depend on whether such executive officers are actually terminated, the date of termination, the manner of the termination and the terms of the agreements in effect at such time. For example, if a named executive officer continues his employment with Parent or Hospitalco Parent following the completion of the merger, and/or is given the opportunity, and elects, to convert a portion of his current equity interests into equity interests of Parent or HospitalCo Parent (or their respective affiliates), the cash amounts payable upon completion of the merger to such named executive officer may be significantly less. Each of the components of compensation discussed below reflects agreements and equity awards in place prior to the execution of the merger agreement. More detail on the payments and benefits included in the table are set forth above in the section entitled “The Merger Proposal (Proposal 1) — Interests of Kindred’s Executive Officers and Directors in the Merger.”

Golden Parachute Compensation

All components of the cash severance amount listed above, except for the payments in respect of the closed performance periods of the outstanding LTIP performance cash awards listed in (ii) above, are “double-trigger” (i.e., they are contingent upon a qualifying termination of employment during the two year period following the completion of the merger). The payments in respect of the closed performance periods of the outstanding LTIP performance cash awards are “single-trigger” (i.e., they will be paid upon the closing of the merger regardless of whether the named executive officer is terminated).

As a condition of receiving the severance benefits under his respective change in control severance agreement, each named executive officer must execute (and not revoke) a general release of claims in favor of Kindred, and comply with the terms and conditions of such release, and comply with the non-solicitation covenant in his change in control severance agreement.

102

The estimated amount of each component of the cash severance payment is set forth in the table below.

103

As a result of the closing of the merger and related events, certain executive officers may have the right to resign for good reason based on the facts and circumstances that exist following the closing.

Financing of the Merger

We anticipate that the total funds needed to complete the merger and the transactions contemplated by the separation agreement (including the funds to pay Kindred stockholders and to pay the holders of other equity-based interests the amounts due to them under the merger agreement), which would be approximately $[●] billion, will be funded through a combination of the following:

The completion of the merger is not conditioned upon Parent’s receipt of financing.

Debt Financing

In connection with the entry into the merger agreement, Parent has obtained a commitment letter (the “Parent debt commitment letter”), dated December 19, 2017, from JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., to provide debt financing upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Parent debt commitment letter in the aggregate amount of up to $2.115 billion, consisting of a $1.360 billion senior secured first lien term facility, a $280 million senior secured first lien revolving facility and a $475 million senior secured second lien term facility (collectively, the “Parent debt facilities”). Subsequent to the entry into the merger agreement, (i) on December 30, 2017, Parent entered into a joinder to add Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs Bank USA and Bank of America, N.A. as additional financing sources and to reallocate the debt commitments among the financing sources on a several, but not joint, basis under the Parent debt commitment letter and (ii) on January 11, 2018, Parent entered into a joinder to add Capital One, National Association, Royal Bank of Canada and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as additional financing sources and to reallocate the debt commitments among the financing sources on a several, but not joint, basis under the Parent debt commitment letter.

In connection with the entry into the merger agreement, HospitalCo Parent has obtained a commitment letter (the “HospitalCo Parent debt commitment letter”; together with the Parent debt commitment letter, the “debt commitment letters”), dated December 19, 2017, from JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. to provide debt financing upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the HospitalCo Parent debt commitment letter in the aggregate amount of up to $860 million, consisting of a $410 million senior secured term loan facility and a $450 million senior secured asset-based loan facility (collectively, the “HospitalCo Parent debt facilities”; together with the Parent debt facilities, the “debt facilities”; the financing available under the debt facilities, the “debt financing”). Subsequent to the entry into the merger agreement, (i) on December 30, 2017, HospitalCo Parent entered into a joinder to add Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Morgan Stanley

104

Senior Funding, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A. as additional financing sources and to reallocate the debt commitments among the financing sources on a several, but not joint, basis under the HospitalCo Parent debt commitment letter and (ii) on January 11, 2018, HospitalCo Parent entered into a joinder to add Capital One, National Association, Royal Bank of Canada and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as additional financing sources and to reallocate the debt commitments among the financing sources on a several, but not joint, basis under the HospitalCo Parent debt commitment letter.

The proceeds of the debt financing will be used (i) to finance the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement and the separation agreement on the closing date, including the payment of any amounts required to be paid by Parent pursuant to the merger agreement on the closing date, (ii) to repay indebtedness of Kindred under its existing credit facilities and senior notes (the “closing refinancing”), (iii) to pay fees and expenses incurred in connection therewith and (iv) to fund working capital and general corporate purposes (including to finance any closing date working capital needs and to replace, backstop or cash collateralize existing letters of credit or intercompany guarantees (if any) of Kindred or its subsidiaries on the closing date). The aggregate principal amount of the debt financing may be increased to fund certain original issue discount or upfront fees in connection with the debt financing.

The obligations of the financing sources under the debt commitment letters to provide the debt financing are subject to a number of conditions, including (i) in the case of the Parent debt facilities, since December 19, 2017, there not having occurred any “homecare material adverse effect” (as defined in the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Representations and Warranties” beginning on page [●]) or any event, occurrence, fact, condition, change or effect that would reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a homecare material adverse effect, (ii) in the case of the HospitalCo Parent debt facilities, since December 19, 2017, there not having occurred any “hospital material adverse effect” (as defined in the section entitled “The Merger Agreement —Representations and Warranties” beginning on page [●]) or any event, occurrence, fact, condition, change or effect that would reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a hospital material adverse effect, (iii) the consummation of the merger in all material respects in accordance with the merger agreement (without giving effect to any amendments, waivers or consents thereof or thereto that are materially adverse to the lenders without the consent of the lead arrangers) prior to, or substantially concurrent with, the initial borrowings under the debt facilities, (iv) the consummation of the equity financing prior to, or substantially concurrent with, the initial borrowings under the debt facilities, (v) the consummation of the closing refinancing (or the giving of irrevocable notice in respect thereof) prior to, or substantially concurrent with, the initial borrowings under the debt facilities, (vi) the delivery of certain audited, unaudited and pro forma financial statements, (vii) the lead arrangers having been afforded a period of at least 15 consecutive business days (subject to certain blackout dates) following the receipt of certain financial statements, (viii) the taking of certain actions necessary to establish and perfect a security interest in the applicable collateral, subject to certain exceptions, (ix) the receipt by the administrative agents of documentation and other information about the borrowers and guarantors required under applicable “know your customer” and anti-money laundering rules and regulations (including the PATRIOT Act), (x) the execution and delivery by the applicable borrowers and guarantors of definitive documentation with respect to the applicable debt facilities consistent with the applicable debt commitment letter, (xi) the delivery of certain customary closing documents (including customary solvency certificates), (xii) the making and accuracy in all material respects of certain representations and warranties, including the specified representations set forth in the applicable debt commitment letter and certain representations and warranties in the merger agreement, and (xiii) the payment of applicable invoiced fees and expenses.

The obligations of the financing sources under the debt commitment letters to provide the debt financing will terminate at 11:59 p.m., New York City time, on August 24, 2018 (or such earlier date which is the earlier of (i) the date on which the merger agreement is terminated by Parent or HospitalCo Parent, as applicable, or otherwise validly terminated in accordance with its terms prior to the consummation of the acquisition and (ii) the date of the consummation of the acquisition and payment of the consideration therefor and related

105

transactions (but not, for the avoidance of doubt, prior to the consummation thereof) without requiring the proceeds of the debt financing), unless the financing sources shall agree to an extension.

If any portion of the debt financing becomes unavailable on the terms and conditions contemplated by the applicable debt commitment letter and the applicable fee letter related thereto (each, a “fee letter”) (including any “market flex” provisions contained in such fee letter), each of Parent and HospitalCo Parent have agreed under the merger agreement to use its reasonable best efforts to, as promptly as practicable following the occurrence of such event, take, or cause to be taken, all actions and do, or cause to be done, all things necessary, proper or advisable to arrange and obtain alternative financing from the same or alternative sources (i) on terms and conditions not less favorable to Parent or HospitalCo Parent, as applicable, than those contemplated in the applicable debt commitment letter and the applicable fee letter (including any “market flex” provisions contained in such fee letter), (ii) with conditions to the funding of such alternative financing not more onerous, taken as a whole, than those conditions and terms contained in the applicable debt commitment letter and (iii) in an aggregate amount, together with other portions of the financing that remain available to Parent and HospitalCo Parent, sufficient to consummate the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement and the separation agreement on the closing date, including the payment of the aggregate per share merger consideration, repayment of existing indebtedness of Kindred, and payment of all fees and expenses reasonably expected to be incurred in connection therewith.

As of the last practicable date before the printing of this proxy statement, the debt commitment letters are in effect, and neither Parent nor HospitalCo Parent has notified us of any plans to utilize alternative financing. The documentation governing the debt financing contemplated by the debt commitment letters has not been finalized and, accordingly, the actual terms of the debt financing may differ from those described in this proxy statement.

Equity Financing

Parent and HospitalCo Parent have received equity commitment letters, dated as of December 19, 2017 (the “equity commitment letters”), from affiliates of each of TPG, WCAS and PSPIB and Humana pursuant to which affiliates of each of TPG, WCAS and PSPIB and Humana have committed, severally but not jointly, on the terms and subject to the conditions of their respective equity commitment letters, to provide equity financing in an aggregate amount up to $1.940 billion solely for the purpose of funding certain amounts required to be paid or deposited by Parent or HospitalCo Parent pursuant to the merger agreement and the separation agreement and paying all fees and expenses required to be paid by Parent and HospitalCo Parent pursuant to the merger agreement and the separation agreement.

Funding of the equity financing is subject to the conditions provided in the equity commitment letters, which include: (i) the execution and delivery of the merger agreement and the separation agreement, (ii) the satisfaction or waiver of each of the conditions to the obligations of Parent, HospitalCo Parent and Merger Sub to effect the closing, (iii) the funding of the debt financing in accordance with the terms of the debt commitment letters, (iv) the funding of the equity financing contemplated by each of the other equity commitment letters and (v) the substantially simultaneous consummation of the merger in accordance with the terms of the merger agreement.

The obligations of affiliates of each of TPG, WCAS and PSPIB and Humana to fund the equity financing will terminate automatically and immediately upon the earliest to occur of (i) the closing of the merger, (ii) the termination of the merger agreement in accordance with its terms (or, if Kindred has made a claim under the equity commitment letters prior to such date, the date that such claim is finally satisfied or otherwise finally resolved), (iii) the acceptance by Kindred or any of its affiliates of all or any portion of Parent’s termination fee or of any payment pursuant to the limited guarantees and (iv) the assertion by Kindred or any of its affiliates of any claim (other than certain specified claims set forth in the limited guarantees) against TPG, WCAS, PSPIB or Humana (as applicable) or any of its affiliates or related parties.

106

Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the merger agreement, the completion of the merger is not conditioned upon Parent’s receipt of the equity financing.

Limited Guarantees

Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the limited guarantees, dated December 19, 2017, each of the “Guarantors” have guaranteed the payment obligations of Parent with respect to (i) the obligation of Parent under the merger agreement to pay the reverse termination fee if the merger agreement is terminated under specified circumstances (see the section entitled “The Merger Agreement — Termination Fees and Expenses”) and (ii) Parent’s obligation to pay certain interest and expenses and certain reimbursement and indemnification obligations of Parent under the merger agreement, including enforcement costs and expenses related to transactions contemplated by the separation agreement, subject to certain caps and limitations set forth in the merger agreement and the limited guarantees.

The Guarantors’ obligations under the limited guarantees are subject to an aggregate cap equal to $110 million.

Each limited guarantee will terminate and be of no further force and effect upon the earliest to occur of: (i) the consummation of the closing of the merger, (ii) such time as the applicable Guarantor under such limited guarantee has made payments in respect of obligations under the applicable limited guarantee that, in the aggregate, equal or exceed the cap set forth in the applicable limited guarantee, (iii) the termination of the merger agreement by mutual consent or in circumstances where Parent is not obligated to pay a reverse termination fee, (iv) December 19, 2018 (or, in the case of clauses (iii) and (iv) above, if Kindred has commenced litigation under and pursuant to the limited guarantee within 60 days following such termination, the date that such action is finally resolved and satisfied) and (v) the assertion by Kindred or any of its affiliates of any claim (other than certain specified claims set forth in the limited guarantees) against the applicable Guarantor or any of its affiliates or related parties.

Kindred’s recourse under and pursuant and subject to the terms and conditions of the limited guarantees and the equity commitment letters is Kindred’s sole and exclusive remedy against TPG, WCAS, Humana and PSPIB and their affiliates or representatives (other than Parent, HospitalCo Parent and Merger Sub) in respect of any liabilities or obligations arising under, or in connection with, the merger agreement, the equity commitment letters, the limited guarantees or the transactions contemplated thereby.

Antitrust Review Required for the Merger and Other Regulatory Filings

U.S. Antitrust

Under the HSR Act and the rules that have been promulgated thereunder by the FTC, we cannot complete the merger until we have given notification and furnished information to the FTC and the DOJ, and until the applicable waiting period has expired or has been terminated. The merger is subject to the waiting period requirements and may not be completed until the expiration of a 30-day waiting period (which may be extended as described below) following the filing of the premerger notification and report forms with the DOJ and the FTC. On January 19, 2018, Kindred and an affiliate of TPG each filed a premerger notification and report form under the HSR Act with the DOJ and the FTC, as a result of which the applicable waiting period under the HSR Act is scheduled to expire on February 20, 2018 at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, unless otherwise terminated or extended if the DOJ or FTC requests additional information and documentary material.

Other Regulatory Filings