Annual Report



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)
 
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013
 
o
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transaction period from                          to
 
Commission file number 000-26621
 
 
NIC INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
Delaware
52-2077581
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 
25501 West Valley Parkway, Suite 300, Olathe, Kansas 66061
(Address of principal executive offices, including Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (877) 234-3468

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
 
Title of Each Class
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, $0.0001 par value per share
The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
___________

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  x No  o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes  o No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  x No  o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o
 
 
 

 
 
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):


Large accelerated filer x
Accelerated filer  o
Non-accelerated filer  o
Smaller reporting company o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes  o No  x

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant, as of June 30, 2013, was approximately $991,897,097 (based on the closing price for shares of the registrant’s common stock as reported by the NASDAQ Global Select Market on that date). Shares of common stock held by each executive officer, director and holder of 10% or more of the outstanding common stock have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status for purposes of this calculation is not intended as a conclusive determination of affiliate status for other purposes.

On February 12, 2014, 65,035,010 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.0001 par value per share, were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement to be issued in connection with its Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held in 2014 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
 
 
 

 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NIC INC.
FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT



   
Page
1
12
21
21
22
22
22
24
25
35
36
58
58
58
59
59
59
60
60
60
 
 
 

 
 
 PART I

CAUTIONS ABOUT FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K regarding NIC Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company,” “NIC,” “we,” “our,” or “us”) and its business, which are not current or historical facts, are “forward-looking statements” that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements of plans and objectives, statements of future economic performance or financial projections, statements of assumptions underlying such statements, and statements of NIC’s or management’s intentions, hopes, beliefs, expectations or predictions of the future. For example, statements like we “expect,” we “believe,” we “plan,” we “intend,” or we “anticipate” are forward-looking statements. Investors should be aware that our actual operating results and financial performance may differ materially from our expressed expectations because of risks and uncertainties about the future including risks related to economic and competitive conditions. Any forward-looking statements made in this Form 10-K speak only as of the date of this report. We will not necessarily update the information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K if any forward-looking statement later turns out to be inaccurate. No one should assume that results projected in or contemplated by the forward-looking statements will continue to be accurate in the future. Details about risks affecting various aspects of our business are included throughout this Form 10-K. Investors should read all of these risks carefully, and should pay particular attention to risks affecting competition issues discussed on page 11, the other specific risk factors discussed on pages 12 to 21, the factors discussed in the introduction to Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and commitments and contingencies described in Notes 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K. Other factors not presently identified may also cause actual results to differ.

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

Our website address is http://www.egov.com . Through this website, we make available, free of charge, on the Investor Relations section of our website ( http://www.egov.com/Investors/Financials/Pages/SEC.aspx ) our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to these reports (if any), as soon as reasonably practicable after these reports are electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). We also make available through our website other reports filed with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), including our proxy statements and reports filed by officers and directors under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. We do not intend for information contained in our website to be part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The public may read and copy any materials that the Company files with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100F Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding the issuers that file electronically with the SEC.

FREQUENTLY USED TERMS

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we use the terms “NIC,” “the Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us” to refer to NIC Inc. and its subsidiaries, unless the context otherwise requires. All references to years, unless otherwise noted, refer to our fiscal year, which ends on December 31. We use the term “eGovernment” to refer to electronic government, and we use the term “portal” to refer to an official government website outsourced to NIC. We use the term “enterprise-wide” to refer to our portals that provide state-wide services to multiple government agencies, which excludes our New Mexico portal, which serves only the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division and its parent (the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department) and our agreements to provide eGovernment services for two state agencies in the Commonwealth of Virginia. We also use the term “partner” to refer to our government clients, with whom we have contractual relationships for eGovernment services.

INDUSTRY AND MARKET DATA

Industry and market data and survey and study results disclosed in this Form 10-K were obtained from industry, university, public interest, government and general publications. We have not independently verified the industry and market data or survey or study results obtained from these publications. Actual future industry and market conditions and results may differ materially from the conditions and results forecasted or reported in these publications.


Business Overview

NIC is a leading provider of eGovernment services that helps governments use the Internet to reduce internal costs, increase efficiencies, and provide a higher level of service to businesses and citizens. We accomplish this currently through two channels: our primary outsourced portal businesses and our software & services businesses. In our primary outsourced portal businesses, we generally enter into long-term contracts with state and local governments to design, build, and operate Internet-based, enterprise-wide portals on their behalf. These portals consist of websites and applications we have built that allow businesses and citizens to access government information online and complete secure transactions, such as applying for a permit, retrieving government records, or filing a government-mandated form or report. The business model supporting most of our long-term contracts is a self-funded model. Our self-funded business model is one where we absorb the costs to build the portal’s technical infrastructure and develop eGovernment services. After a service has launched, we and our government partners share a portion of the fees generated from electronic transactions, which are paid by the end users of the service. Our government partners benefit by reducing their financial and technology risks, increasing their operational efficiencies, and gaining a centralized, customer-focused presence on the Internet, while businesses and citizens receive a faster, more convenient, and more cost-effective means to interact with governments. We are typically responsible for funding up-front investment and ongoing operations and maintenance costs of the government portals.
 
 
1

 
 
We typically enter into multi-year contracts with our government partners and manage operations for each contractual relationship through separate local subsidiaries that operate as decentralized businesses with a high degree of autonomy. Our business plan is to increase our revenues by delivering new services to a growing number of government entities within our existing contractual relationships and by signing long-term portal contracts with new government partners.

Our software & services businesses operate primarily through NIC Technologies, LLC (“NIC Technologies”), our subsidiary, which provides software development and services, other than enterprise-wide outsourced portal services, to state and local governments as well as federal agencies.

Segment Information

Our Outsourced Portals segment is our only reportable segment and generally includes our subsidiaries that operate outsourced state and local government portals and the corporate divisions that support portal operations. The Other Software & Services category primarily includes our subsidiaries that provide software development and services, other than enterprise-wide outsourced portal services, to state and local governments as well as federal agencies. For additional information relating to our reportable and operating segments, refer to Note 11 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K.

Industry Background

The market for business-to-government and citizen-to-government transactions

Government regulation of commercial and consumer activities requires billions of transactions and exchanges of large volumes of information between government agencies and the businesses they regulate and the citizens they serve. These transactions and exchanges include, but are not limited to: motor vehicle driver history record retrieval, motor vehicle registrations, tax returns, permit applications, and requests for government-gathered information. Government agencies typically defray the cost of processing these transactions and of storing, retrieving, and distributing information through a combination of general tax revenues, service fees, and charges for direct access to public records.

The limits of traditional government transaction methods

Traditionally, government agencies have transacted, and in many cases continue to transact, with businesses and citizens using processes that are inconvenient and labor-intensive, require extensive paperwork, and use outmoded technology and large amounts of scarce staff resources. Transactions and information requests are often made in person or by mail, which increases the potential for the compromise of sensitive personal information or errors that require revisions and follow-ups, particularly if the transactions and information requested are processed manually. Even newer methods, including telephone response systems, rely on multiple systems and potentially incompatible data formats, and require significant expertise and expenditures to introduce and maintain. As a result, businesses and citizens often have no choice but to face costly delays to complete essential tasks. These delays include waiting in line at a government agency, for answers by telephone, for responses by mail, or for payments by check. In addition, government agencies may not use modern methods of electronic payment, leaving businesses and citizens unable to pay certain fees online or at the counter using credit/debit cards or electronic checks, or government agencies may require advance payment rather than monthly billing. Businesses and citizens encounter further inconvenience and delay because they usually can work with government agencies only during normal business hours. Even when electronic alternatives are available, they often require a cumbersome process of multiple contacts with different government agencies or outdated payment methods. Increases in the level of economic activity and in the population have exacerbated these problems and increased the demand for new services.

Growth of the Internet, electronic commerce, and eGovernment

The Internet is a global medium that enables billions of people worldwide to share information, communicate, and conduct business electronically. The Pew Research Center, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group that provides information on the issues shaping America, launched the Pew Internet & American Life Project to study the social impact of the Internet.

According to the Project’s Spring 2013 survey on Internet access, 85% of all American adults use the Internet, compared to just 64% of all American adults 10 years ago. Nearly all, 91%, use a search engine to find information on the Internet, with 67% using the Internet to visit a local, state, or federal government website. In addition, Americans continue to access the Internet through various devices: 61% of American adults have a laptop computer, 58% have a desktop computer, 56% have a smartphone, 26% own an e-book reader, and 34% own a tablet computer. Among smartphone owners, young adults, minorities, those with no college experience, and those with lower household income levels are more likely than other groups to say that their phone is their main source of Internet access.
 
 
2

 
 
This recent data points to a rapid increase in mobile technology use. One goal of the White House 2012 Digital Government Strategy: “Building a 21st Century Platform to Better Serve the American People,” is to “enable the American people and an increasingly mobile workforce to access high-quality digital government information and services anywhere, anytime, on any device.” According to a 2013 Pew study, 63% of all cell phone owners use the device to access the Internet – up from 38% just three years ago. In addition the Pew study noted that “21% of all adult cell phone owners now do most of their online browsing using their mobile phone – and not some other device such as a desktop or laptop computer.”

In its “Analytical Perspectives of the Budget of U.S. Government,” the Office of Management and Budget of the Obama Administration stated that it is committed to building a 21st century government that is more efficient and effective for the American people, with information technology as a critical component of reaching that goal. Therefore, the federal government is planning to invest $82.0 billion on information technology (“IT”) in fiscal year 2014. According to IT consultancy Gartner, worldwide IT spending is estimated to reach $3.8 trillion by the end of 2014, $100 billion more than 2013.

Acceptance of the Internet as a medium for eGovernment

The acceptance of the Internet and electronic commerce presents a significant opportunity for the development of eGovernment, in which government agencies conduct transactions and distribute information over the Internet. By using the Internet, government agencies can increase the volume and efficiency of interactions with constituents without significantly increasing expenditures or demands on current personnel. In addition, regardless of physical distance, businesses and citizens can obtain government information quickly and easily over the Internet. For example, motor vehicle administrators can provide instantaneous responses to auto insurers’ requests for driving record data by allowing controlled access to government databases through the Internet. This online interaction reduces costs for both government and users and decreases response times compared to providing the same data by mail.

Challenges to the implementation of eGovernment services

Despite the potential benefits of eGovernment, barriers to creating successful Internet-based services occasionally preclude governments from implementing them. Some of these barriers are similar to those the private sector encounters, including:

the high cost of implementing and maintaining Internet technology in a budget-constrained environment;

the need to quickly assess the requirements of potential customers and cost-effectively design and implement eGovernment services that are tailored to meet these requirements;

the intense competition for qualified technical personnel; and

the need for updated Internet and mobile friendly payment methods, that are secure and compliant with Payment Card Industry standards.

Governments also face some unique challenges that exacerbate the difficulty of advancing to Internet-based services, including:

lengthy and potentially politically charged appropriations processes that make it difficult for governments to acquire resources and to develop Internet services quickly;

a diverse and substantially autonomous group of government agencies that have adopted varying and fragmented approaches to providing information and transactions over the Internet;

a lack of marketing expertise to ensure that services are designed to meet the needs of businesses and citizens, to increase the awareness of the availability of the services, and to drive adoption of the online service delivery channel;
 
security and privacy concerns that are amplified by the confidential nature of the information and transactions available from and conducted with governments and the view that government information is part of the public trust;

changes in administration and turnover in government personnel among influencers and key decision makers; and

barriers to use of credit/debit cards and electronic check payments.

We believe many private sector service providers generally do not address the unique needs of enterprise-wide eGovernment. Most service providers do not fully understand and are not well-equipped to deal with the unique political, regulatory, and security structures of governments. These providers, including large systems integrators, typically take a time-and-materials, project-based pricing approach and provide “off-the-shelf” solutions designed for other industries that may not adequately address the needs of government.
 
 
3

 
 
What We Provide to Governments

We provide Internet-based eGovernment services designed to meet the needs of governments, businesses, and citizens. The key elements of our service delivery are:

Customer-focused, one-stop government portal

Using our marketing and technical expertise and our government experience, we generally design, build, and operate Internet-based portals on an enterprise-wide basis for our state and local government partners and Internet-based services for our federal partners that are designed to meet their needs as well as those of the businesses and citizens they serve. Our enterprise-wide outsourced portals are designed to create a single point of presence on the Internet that allows businesses and citizens to reach the website of every government agency in a specific jurisdiction from one online location. We strive to employ a common look and feel in the websites of all government agencies associated with each state’s government portal and make them useful, appealing, and easy to use. In addition to developing and managing the government portal, we develop applications that allow businesses and citizens to complete processes that have traditionally required separate offline interactions with several different government agencies or older generation electronic access. These applications permit businesses and citizens to conduct transactions with government agencies and to obtain information 24 hours per day and seven days per week using the latest technology and payment methods. We also help our government partners generate awareness and educate businesses and citizens about the availability and potential benefits of eGovernment services.

Compelling and flexible financial models for governments

With our self-funded business model, we allow governments to implement comprehensive eGovernment services at minimal cost and risk. We take on the responsibility and cost of designing, building, and operating government portals and applications, with minimal use of government resources. We employ our technological resources and accumulated expertise to help governments avoid the risks of selecting and investing in new and often untested technologies that may be implemented by unproven third-party providers. We implement our services rapidly, efficiently, and accurately, using our well-tested and reliable infrastructure and processes. Once we establish a portal and the associated applications, we manage transaction flows, data exchange and payment processing, and we fund ongoing costs from the fees received from portal users, who access information and conduct transactions through the portal. A 2013 study by the University of Utah of nearly 1,500 businesses in three NIC partner states, found that 95% approve of their state’s eGovernment services, with 90% preferring to conduct business with state government online and 96% saying that eGovernment services save their business time. In addition, the majority of the businesses surveyed said they believe fees associated with eGovernment services are reasonable and that eGovernment services reinforce the perception that the state is business-friendly. A 2012 study by the University of Utah found that by placing just nine high-volume services online and by utilizing NIC’s self-funded business model, the state of Utah avoided approximately $61 million in costs related to the operations of its official web portal and the development of online services from fiscal years 2007 through 2011. We are also able to provide specific fee-based application and outsourced portal solutions to governments who cannot or do not wish to pursue a self-funded portal solution.

Focused relationship with governments

We form relationships with governments by developing an in-depth understanding of their interests and then aligning our interests with theirs. By tying our revenues to the development of successful services and applications, we work to assure government agencies and constituents that we are focused on their needs. Moreover, we have pioneered and encourage our partners to adopt a model for eGovernment policymaking that involves the formation of oversight boards to bring together interested government agencies, business and consumer groups, and other vested interest constituencies in a single forum. We work within this forum to maintain constant contact with government agencies and constituents and strive to ensure their participation in the development of eGovernment services. We attempt to understand and facilitate the resolution of potential disputes among these participants to maximize the benefits of our services. We also design our services to observe relevant privacy and security regulations, so that they meet the same high standards of integrity, confidentiality, and public service as government agencies strive to observe in their own actions.
 
 
4

 
 
Government Contracts

Our outsourced enterprise-wide state contracts

The following is a summary of the portals in each state through which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced portal services to multiple government agencies at December 31, 2013:
 
 
NIC Portal Entity
 
Portal Website (State)
Year Services
Commenced
Contract Expiration Date
(Renewal Options Through)
Wisconsin Interactive Network, LLC
www.wisconsin.gov (Wisconsin)
2013
5/13/2018 (5/13/2023)
Pennsylvania Interactive, LLC*
www.pa.gov (Pennsylvania)
2012
11/30/2017 (11/30/2022)
NICUSA, OR Division
www.oregon.gov (Oregon)
2011
11/22/2021
NICUSA, MD Division 
www.maryland.gov (Maryland)
2011
8/10/2016 (8/10/2019)
Delaware Interactive, LLC
www.delaware.gov (Delaware)
2011
9/25/2014 (9/25/2017)
Mississippi Interactive, LLC
www.ms.gov (Mississippi)
2011
12/31/2015 (12/31/2021)
New Jersey Interactive, LLC
www.nj.gov (New Jersey)
2009
6/30/2014
Texas NICUSA, LLC
www.Texas.gov (Texas)
2009
8/31/2016 (8/31/2018)
West Virginia Interactive, LLC
www.WV.gov (West Virginia)
2007
6/30/2014
NICUSA, AZ Division
www.AZ.gov (Arizona)
2007
In transition period – 3/26/2014 (6/26/2014)
Vermont Information Consortium, LLC
www.Vermont.gov (Vermont)
2006
6/8/2016 (6/8/2019)
Colorado Interactive, LLC
www.Colorado.gov (Colorado)
2005
5/18/2014
South Carolina Interactive, LLC
www.SC.gov (South Carolina)
2005
7/15/2014
Kentucky Interactive, LLC
www.Kentucky.gov (Kentucky)
2003
8/31/2014 (8/31/2015)
Alabama Interactive, LLC
www.Alabama.gov (Alabama)
2002
2/28/2015 (2/28/2017)
Rhode Island Interactive, LLC
www.RI.gov (Rhode Island)
2001
2/28/2014
Oklahoma Interactive, LLC
www.OK.gov (Oklahoma)
2001
12/31/2014
Montana Interactive, LLC
www.MT.gov (Montana)
2001
12/31/2015 (12/31/2020)
NICUSA, TN Division
www.TN.gov (Tennessee)
2000
9/30/2014 (3/30/2016)
Hawaii Information Consortium, LLC
www.eHawaii.gov (Hawaii)
2000
1/3/2016 (unlimited 3-year renewal options)
Idaho Information Consortium, LLC
www.Idaho.gov (Idaho)
2000
6/30/2015
Utah Interactive, LLC
www.Utah.gov (Utah)
1999
6/5/2016 (6/5/2019)
Maine Information Network, LLC
www.Maine.gov (Maine)
1999
7/1/2016 (3/14/2018)
Arkansas Information Consortium, LLC
www.Arkansas.gov (Arkansas)
1997
6/30/2018
Iowa Interactive, LLC
www.Iowa.gov (Iowa)
1997
3/31/2014
Indiana Interactive, LLC
www.IN.gov (Indiana)
1995
7/1/2014
Nebraska Interactive, LLC
www.Nebraska.gov (Nebraska)
1995
1/31/2016
Kansas Information Consortium, Inc.
www.Kansas.gov (Kansas)
1992
12/31/2014 (12/31/2017)

*See Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K for discussion of the Pennsylvania contract.

Contract Developments
 
During the first quarter of 2013, we received a one-year contract extension from the state of Kansas, a two-year contract extension from the state of Nebraska and a four-month contract extension from the state of Vermont. Additionally, we received a five-month contract extension from the state of Rhode Island.

During the second quarter of 2013, we were awarded a five-year contract by the state of Wisconsin to manage its government portal, which includes an option for the government to extend the contract up to an additional five years. In addition, we were awarded a new three-year contract from the state of Vermont, which includes an option for the government to extend the contract for one additional three-year period. We also received a two-year contract extension from the state of Idaho, one-year contract extensions from the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the state of New Jersey, and six-month contract extensions from the state of Iowa and the state of Arizona with respect to the expiring Arizona portal contract.

During the third quarter of 2013, we received a two-year contract extension from the state of Maine. In addition, we received a six-month contract extension from the state of West Virginia and a three-month contract extension from the state of Iowa.

During the fourth quarter of 2013, we received a one-year contract extension from the state of Oklahoma, a six-month contract extension from the state of West Virginia and a three-month contract extension from the state of Arizona with respect to the expiring Arizona portal contract.

During the first quarter of 2014, we were awarded a three-year contract with the state of Connecticut to manage its government portal, which includes renewal options for the government to extend the contract up to an additional three years. In addition, the Company received a three-month contract extension from the state of Iowa and a two-month contract extension from the state of Rhode Island.
 
 
5

 
 
Portal Agreements

Our outsourced government portals operate under separate contracts that generally have an initial multi-year term. Under a typical self-funded contract, a government agrees that:

we have the right to develop a comprehensive Internet portal owned by that government to deliver eGovernment services;

the portal we establish is the primary electronic and Internet interface between the government and its businesses and citizens;

it will advocate the use of the portal for all commercially valuable applications in order to support the operation and expansion of the portal;

it will sponsor access to agencies and local governments for the purpose of our entering into agreements with these agencies to develop applications for their data and transactions and to link their Web pages to the portal; and

it will establish a policy-making and fee approval authority, which typically includes agency members, business customers, and others, to establish prices for services and to set other policies.

In return, we agree to:

develop, manage, market, maintain, and expand that government’s portal and information and electronic commerce applications;

assume the investment risk of building and operating that government’s portal and applications without the direct use of tax dollars;

process electronic payments;

bear the risk of collecting transaction fees; and

have an independent audit conducted upon that government’s request.

We typically own all the intellectual property in connection with the applications we develop under our government portal contracts. After completion of a defined contract term, our government partner typically receives a perpetual, royalty-free license to use the software only in its own portal. However, certain customer management, billing, and payment processing software applications that we have developed and standardized centrally and that are utilized by our portal businesses, are being provided to an increasing number of our government partners on a software-as-a-service, or “SaaS,” basis, and thus would not be included in any royalty-free license. If our contract was not renewed after a defined term or if our contract was terminated by our government partner for cause, the government agency would be entitled to take over the portal in place with no future obligation of or to us, except as otherwise provided in the contract and except for the services we provide on a SaaS basis, which would be available to our partners on a fee-for-service basis. We also provide certain payment processing services on a SaaS basis to a few private sector companies and to state and local agencies in states where we do not maintain an enterprise-wide outsourced portal contract, and may continue to market these services to other entities in the future. Historically, however, revenues from these services have not been material. In some cases, we enter into contracts to provide consulting, application development, and portal management services to governments in exchange for an agreed-upon fee.

We also enter into separate agreements with various agencies and divisions of our government partners for the sale of electronic access to public records and to conduct other transactions. These agreements preliminarily establish the pricing of the electronic transactions and data access services we provide and the amounts we must remit to the agency. These terms are then submitted to the policy-making and fee approval authority for approval. Generally, our contracts provide that the amount of any fees we retain is set by governments to provide us with a reasonable return or profit. We have limited control over the level of fees we are permitted to retain. Any changes made to the amount or percentage of fees retained by us, or to the amounts charged for the services offered, could materially affect the profitability of the respective contract to us. We do have the general ability to control certain of our expenses in the event of a reduction in the amount or percentage of fees we retain; however, there may be a lag in the time it takes to do so should we determine it is necessary.

Any renewal of these contracts beyond the initial term by the government is optional and a government may terminate its contract prior to the expiration date if we breach a material contractual obligation and fail to cure such breach within a specified period or upon the occurrence of other events or circumstances specified in the contract. In addition, 15 contracts under which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced state portal services can be terminated by the other party without cause on a specified period of notice. Collectively, revenues generated from these contracts represented 57% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. In the event that any of these contracts is terminated without cause, the terms of the respective contract may require the government to pay a fee to us in order to continue to use our software in its portal. In addition, the loss of one or more of our larger state portal partners, such as Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Montana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, or Utah, as a result of the expiration, termination, or failure to renew the respective contract, if such partner is not replaced, could significantly reduce our revenues and profitability. See the discussion below under “Expiring Contracts” regarding the expiration of our contracts with the Commonwealth of Virginia and the state of Arizona.
 
 
6

 
 
Our other outsourced state contracts

Our subsidiary, New Mexico Interactive, LLC, has a contract to manage eGovernment services for the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division (“MVD”) and its parent, the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department. During the second quarter of 2013, we received a one-year contract extension from the MVD to manage the state’s driver history database through June 30, 2014.

During the second quarter of 2013, our subsidiary, Virginia Interactive, LLC (“VI” or “Virginia Interactive”), signed an agreement with the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries to provide eGovernment services from September 1, 2013 through February 28, 2015, which includes an option for the agency to extend the contract for one additional six-month period through August 31, 2015. During the third quarter of 2013, VI signed an agreement with the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia to provide eGovernment services from September 1, 2013 through August 31, 2014, which includes an option for the agency to extend the contract for one additional 12-month period through August 31, 2015.

Our software & services businesses

NIC Technologies has a contract with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (“FMCSA”) to develop and manage the FMCSA’s Pre-Employment Screening Program (“PSP”) for motor carriers nationwide, using the self-funded, transaction-based business model. During the first quarter of 2014, the FMCSA exercised a one-year renewal option for the PSP contract, extending its term through February 16, 2015.   NIC Technologies also designs and develops online campaign expenditure and ethics compliance systems for federal and state government agencies. Its contract with the state of Michigan expires on March 31, 2014, and its contract with the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) expired on June 30, 2013. For the year ended December 31, 2013, revenues from the FEC contract accounted for less than 1% of our total consolidated revenues.

Any renewal of these software & services contracts beyond the initial term is optional and a government agency may terminate its contract prior to the expiration date if we breach a material contractual obligation and fail to cure such breach within a specified period or upon the occurrence of other events or circumstances specified in the contract. The contract with the FMCSA can be terminated by the other party without cause on a specified period of notice. The loss of the contract with the FMCSA, as a result of the expiration, termination, or failure to renew the contract, if not replaced, could significantly reduce our revenues and profitability. In addition, we have limited control over the level of fees we are permitted to retain under the contract with the FMCSA. Any changes made to the amount or percentage of fees retained by us, or to the amounts charged for the services offered, could materially affect the profitability of this contract to us.

Expiring contracts

As of December 31, 2013, there were 15 contracts under which we provide outsourced portal services or software development and services that have expiration dates within the 12-month period following December 31, 2013. Collectively, revenues generated from these contracts represented 38% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. As described above, if a contract is not renewed after a defined term, the government partner would be entitled to take over the portal in place with no future obligation by us, except as otherwise provided in the contract and except for the services we provide on a SaaS basis, which would be available to the government agency on a fee-for-service basis.

The contract under which our subsidiary, Virginia Interactive, provided outsourced portal services to agencies of the Commonwealth of Virginia expired on August 31, 2012. As more fully disclosed in a Form 8-K filed by us with the SEC on April 18, 2012, VI chose not to agree to terms mandated by the Commonwealth of Virginia for a new contract. VI provided transition services as required by the contract through August 31, 2013. The costs we incurred in transitioning out of VI’s contract with the Commonwealth of Virginia, including employee retention bonuses, operating lease termination costs, and fixed asset impairment, did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition. For the year ended December 31, 2013, revenues from the legacy Virginia portal contract accounted for approximately 2% of our total consolidated revenues.

During the first quarter of 2013, our subsidiary, NICUSA, Inc. (“NICUSA”), chose not to respond to a request for proposal issued by the state of Arizona for a new contract. The contract under which NICUSA provided outsourced portal services to agencies of the state of Arizona expired on June 26, 2013. However, during the second quarter of 2013, we received a six-month contract extension from the state of Arizona to provide transition services through December 26, 2013, which included options for the government to extend the contract for two additional three-month periods. During the fourth quarter of 2013, the state of Arizona exercised a three-month renewal option, extending its contract term through March 26, 2014. We have evaluated the costs which may be incurred in transitioning out of NICUSA’s contract with the state of Arizona, including employee retention bonuses, operating lease termination costs, and fixed asset impairment, which are not expected to have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition. For the year ended December 31, 2013, revenues from the Arizona portal contract accounted for approximately 1% of our total consolidated revenues.
 
 
7

 
 
Our Portal Service Offerings

We work with our state and local government partners to develop, manage, and enhance comprehensive, enterprise-wide, Internet-based portals to deliver eGovernment services to their constituents. Our portals are designed to provide user-friendly, convenient, secure multi-channel access, including mobile access, to in-demand government information and services, and include numerous fee-based transaction services and applications that we have developed. These fee-based services and applications allow businesses and citizens to access constantly changing government information and to file necessary government documents. The types of services and the fees charged vary in each portal installation according to the unique preferences of that jurisdiction. In an effort to reduce the frustration businesses and citizens often encounter when dealing with multiple government agencies, we handle cross-agency communications whenever feasible and shield businesses and citizens from the complexity of older, mainframe-based systems that agencies commonly use, creating an intuitive and efficient interaction with governments. We also provide industry- compliant payment processing systems that accommodate credit/debit cards and electronic checks, as applicable.

Some of the online services we currently offer in different jurisdictions include :

Product or Service
 
Description
 
Primary Users
Motor Vehicle Driver History Record Retrieval
 
For those legally authorized businesses, this service offers controlled instant look-up of driving history records. Includes commercial licenses.
 
Insurance companies
         
Vehicle Title, Lien & Registration
 
Provides controlled interactive title, registration, and lien database access. Permits citizens to renew their vehicle registrations online.
 
Insurance companies, lenders, citizens
         
Motor Vehicle Inspections
 
Allows licensed state inspection stations to file certified motor vehicle and emissions testing inspections online.
 
Businesses
         
Temporary Vehicle Tags
 
Records temporary vehicle tag registration of a newly purchased car in real time with the state and issues a customized temporary plate for display on the vehicle.
 
Automobile dealerships, citizens, law enforcement
         
Driver’s License Renewal
 
Permits citizens to renew their driver’s license online using a credit/debit card.
 
Citizens
         
Hunting and Fishing Licenses
 
 
Permits citizens to obtain and pay for outdoor recreation licenses over the Internet or from point-of-purchase retail kiosks.
 
Citizens
         
Health Professional License Services
 
Allows users to search databases on several health professions to verify license status.
 
Hospitals, clinics, health insurers, citizens
         
Professional License Renewal
 
Permits professionals to renew their licenses online using a credit/debit card.
 
Attorneys, doctors, nurses, architects, and other licensed professionals
         
Business Registrations and Renewals
 
Allows business owners to search for and reserve a business name, submit and pay for the business registration, and renew the business registration on an annual basis.
 
Businesses
         
Secretary of State Business Searches
 
Allows users to access filings of corporations, partnerships, and other entities, including charter documents.
 
Attorneys, lenders
         
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Searches and Filings
 
Permits searches of the UCC database to verify financial liens, and permits filings of secured financial documents.
 
Attorneys, lenders
 
 
8

 
 
Product or Service
 
Description
 
Primary Users
Limited Criminal History Searches
 
 
For those legally authorized, provides users with the ability to obtain a limited criminal history report on a specified individual.
 
Schools, governments, human resource professionals, nonprofits working with children or handicapped adults
         
Court Services
 
Allows authorized users to search court record databases, make payments for court fines, and in some cases electronically file court documents.
 
Legal professionals, citizens
         
Vital Records
 
Provides authorized access to birth, death, marriage, domestic partnership and civil union certificates.
 
Citizens
         
Income and Property Tax Payments
 
Allows users to file and pay for a variety of state and local income and property taxes.
 
Businesses and citizens
         
Payment Processing
 
Permits use of the Internet for secure industry-compliant credit/debit card and electronic check payment processing both online and at the point of retail sale for government agency transactions.
 
Businesses and citizens

In addition to these services, we also provide customer service and support. Our customer service representatives serve as a liaison between our government partners and businesses and citizens.
 
Revenues

In our outsourced state and local portal businesses, we currently earn revenues from three main sources: transaction-based fees, time and materials-based fees for application development, and fixed fees for portal management services. In most of our outsourced portal businesses, the majority of our revenues are generated from transactions, which generally include the collection of transaction-based fees and subscription fees from users. The following table reflects the underlying sources of portal revenues as a percentage of total portal revenues for the years ended December 31:
 
Percentage of Portal Revenues:
 
2013
   
2012
   
2011
 
Transaction-based
    90 %     87 %     86 %
Time and materials fees for application development
    6 %     8 %     9 %
Fixed fees for portal management
    4 %     5 %     5 %
 
The following table identifies each type of service, customer, and portal partner that accounted for 10% or more of our total consolidated revenues in any of the past three years:
 
   
Percentage of Total Consolidated Revenues
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
2011
 
Type of Service
                 
Motor Vehicle Driver History Record Retrieval
    34 %     34 %     36 %
(This is the highest volume, most commercially
                       
valuable service we offer)
                       
                         
Motor Vehicle Registrations
    13 %     10 %     *  
                         
Customer
                       
LexisNexis Risk Solutions
    22 %     23 %     28 %
(Resells motor vehicle driver history records
                       
to the insurance industry)
                       
                         
Portal Partner
                       
Texas
    23 %     21 %     21 %
 
* Motor Vehicle Registrations accounted for less than 10% of our total consolidated revenues in 2011.
 
 
9

 
 
Our contracts with data resellers, including LexisNexis Risk Solutions, are generally self-renewing until canceled by one side or the other, and generally may be terminated at any time after a 60-day notice. These contracts may be terminated immediately at the option of any party upon a material breach of the contract by the other party. Furthermore, these contracts are immediately terminable if the state statute allowing for the public release of these records is repealed.

Sales and Marketing

We have two primary sales and marketing goals:

to retain and grow our revenue streams from existing government relationships; and

to develop new sources of revenues through new government relationships.

We have well-established sales and marketing processes for achieving these goals, which are managed by our national sales division and a marketing department within most of our outsourced portal businesses.

Developing new sources of revenue

We focus our new government sales and marketing efforts on increasing the number of governments and government agencies that are receptive to a public/private model for delivering information and/or completing transactions over the Internet. We meet regularly with interested government officials to educate them on the public/private model and its potential advantages for their jurisdictions. Members of our management team are also regular speakers at conferences devoted to the application of Internet technologies to facilitate the relationship between governments and their citizens. In states where we believe interest is significant, we seek to develop supportive, educational relationships with professional and business organizations that may benefit from the government service improvements our service delivery can produce. We also focus our corporate marketing efforts on key government decision makers through the use of print media, advertising, white paper development, media relations, and corporate communications. In addition, we continue to develop relationships with key government decision makers to expand our opportunities to manage eGovernment services in the federal arena.

Once a government decides to implement a public/private model for managing Internet access to information resources and transactions, it typically starts a selection process that operates under special rules that apply to government purchasing. These rules typically require open bidding by possible service providers against a list of requirements established by the government under existing procedures or procedures specifically created for the Internet provider selection process. We respond to requests for bids with a proposal that outlines in detail our philosophy and plans for implementing our business model. Once our proposal is selected, we enter into negotiations for a contract.

Growing existing markets

In our existing state and local government relationships, our marketing efforts focus on:

expanding the number of government agencies that provide services or information on the government portal;

identifying new information and transactions that can be usefully and cost-effectively delivered over the Internet;

working with the governance authorities in our existing markets to ensure that online services are priced in a manner to encourage usage; and

increasing the number of potential users who do business with governments over the Internet.

Although each government’s unique political and economic environment drives different marketing and development priorities, we have found many of our core applications to be relevant across multiple jurisdictions. Most of our enterprise-wide outsourced portal businesses have a director of marketing and additional marketing staff who meet regularly with government, business, and consumer representatives to discuss potential new services. We also promote the use of our extensive library of unique revenue-generating eGovernment services to existing and new customers through speaking engagements and targeted advertising to organizations for professionals, including lawyers, bankers, and insurance agents who have a need for regular interaction with government. We identify services that have been developed and implemented successfully for one government and replicate them in other jurisdictions.

Technology and Operations

Over the past 22 years, we have made substantial investments in the development of Internet-based applications and operations specifically designed to allow businesses and citizens to transact with and receive information from governments. The scope of our technological expertise includes network engineering as it applies to the interconnection of government systems to the Internet, Internet security, Web-to-legacy system integration, Web-to-mainframe integration, Web-to-mobile integration, database design, website administration, Web page development, and payment processing. Within this scope, we have developed and implemented a comprehensive Internet portal framework for governments, and a broad array of stand-alone products and services using a combination of our own proprietary technologies and commercially available, licensed technologies. We believe that our technological expertise, coupled with our in-depth understanding of governmental processes and systems, has made us adept at rapidly creating tailored portal services that keep our partners on the forefront of eGovernment.
 
 
10

 
 
Each of our government partners has unique priorities and needs in the development of its eGovernment services. More than half of our employees work in the Internet services, application development, and technology operations areas, and most are focused on a single government partner’s application needs. Our employees develop an understanding of a specific government’s application priorities, technical profiles, and information technology personnel and management. At the same time, all of our development directors are trained by experienced technical staff from our other operations, and there is frequent communication and collaboration, which ensures that our government partners can make use of the most advanced eGovernment services we have developed throughout our organization.

Some of our portals and applications are physically hosted in each jurisdiction in which we operate on servers that we own or lease. The rest of our portals and applications are hosted at a central data facility operated by a third party, with backup at a similar facility in another location. We also provide links to sites that are maintained by government agencies or organizations that we do not manage. Our businesses provide uninterrupted online service 24 hours per day and seven days a week, and our operations maintain extensive backup, security, and disaster recovery procedures.

History has proven that our systems and applications are scalable and can easily be replicated from one government entity to another. We focus on sustaining low-overhead operations, with all major investments driven by the objective of deploying the highest value-added technology and applications to each operation.

Finally, we have designed our government portals and applications to be compatible with virtually any existing system and to be rapidly deployable. To enable speed and efficiency of deployment, we license commercially available technology whenever possible and focus on the integration and customization of these “off-the-shelf” hardware and software components when necessary. While we expect that commercially licensed technology will continue to be available at reasonable costs, there can be no assurance that the licenses for such third-party technologies will not be terminated or that we will be able to license third-party technology and applications for future services. While we do not believe that any one individual technology or application we license is material to our business, changes in or the loss of third party licenses could lead to a material increase in the costs of licensing or to our products becoming inoperable or their performance being materially reduced, with the result that we may need to incur additional development or procurement costs in an attempt to ensure continued performance of our services.

We regard our intellectual property as important to our success. We rely on a combination of nondisclosure and other contractual arrangements with governments, our employees, subcontractors and other third parties, copyrights and privacy and trade secret laws to protect and limit the distribution of the proprietary software applications, documentation, and processes we have developed in connection with the eGovernment services we offer.

Competition

We face intense competition in all sectors of our business. We believe that the principal factors upon which our businesses compete are:

our unique understanding of government needs;

the quality and fit of eGovernment services;

speed and responsiveness to the needs of businesses and citizens; and

cost-effectiveness.

We believe we compete favorably with respect to the above-listed factors. In most cases, the principal alternative for our services is a government-designed and managed service that integrates other vendors’ technologies, products, and services. Companies that have expertise in marketing and providing technical electronic services to government entities compete with us by further developing their services and increasing their focus on this segment of their business. Many of our potential competitors are national or international in scope and have greater resources than we do.

Additionally, in some geographic areas, we may face competition from smaller consulting firms with established reputations and political relationships with potential government partners. Examples of companies that may compete and/or currently compete with us are the following:

large systems integrators, including CGI and Unisys;

traditional software applications developers, including Microsoft and Oracle;

traditional consulting firms, including IBM Corp. and Accenture, Ltd.; and

electronic transaction payment processors, including ACI Worldwide, Inc. (which acquired Official Payments Holdings, Inc. in 2013) and Link2Gov Corp.
 
 
11

 
 
Seasonality

The use of some of our eGovernment services is seasonal, particularly the accessing of motor vehicle driver history records, resulting in lower revenues from this service in the fourth quarter of each calendar year, due to the lower number of business days in this quarter and a lower volume of transactions during the holiday period.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, we had 773 full-time employees, of which 140 were working in corporate operations, 619 were in our outsourced portal businesses and 14 were in our software & services businesses. Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to continue to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified technical and management personnel. We also employ independent contractors to support our application development, marketing, sales, and administrative departments. Our employees are not covered by any collective bargaining agreement, and we have never experienced a work stoppage. We believe that our relations with our employees are good.
 

Our operations are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those described below. If any of these risks actually occur, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In that case, the value of our common stock could decline substantially.

Security breaches or unauthorized access to sensitive information and/or personal information that we store, process, use or transmit in our business may harm our reputation and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

A significant challenge to electronic commerce is the secure transmission of sensitive and/or personal information over information technology networks and systems which process, transmit and store electronic information, and manage or support a variety of business processes. The collection, maintenance, use, disclosure, and disposal of sensitive and personal information by our businesses are regulated at the state and federal levels. Furthermore, we are required to comply with the Payment Card Industry’s Data Security Standards, or PCI DSS, and the rules and standards promulgated by the National Automated Clearing House Association, or NACHA, because we provide online payment and electronic check processing services. Because we provide the electronic transmission of sensitive and personal information released from and filed with various government entities and we perform online payment and electronic check processing services, we face the risk of a security breach, whether through computer hacking, acts of vandalism or theft, malware, computer viruses, or other forms of cyber attack that could lead to significant disruptions or compromises of our information technology networks and systems or the unauthorized release or use of sensitive or personal information.

We rely on encryption and authentication technology purchased or licensed from third parties to provide the security and authentication tools to effectively secure transmission of confidential information, including user credit card information and banking data. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography, threats that evolve ahead of tools designed to counter them, or other developments may result in the breach or compromise of technology used by us to protect transaction data. Data breaches can also occur as a result of non-technical issues, such as so-called “social engineering.”

Despite the various security measures we have in place to protect sensitive and personal information from unauthorized disclosure and to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations, our information technology networks and systems and those of our third party vendors and service providers can never be made completely secure against security incidents, and a breach may still occur. Even the most well protected information, networks, systems, and facilities remain potentially vulnerable, because (i) attempted security breaches or disruptions may occur in the future, (ii) the techniques used in such attempts are constantly evolving and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, and in some cases are designed not to be detected and, in fact, may not be detected for an extended period and (iii) the security methodologies, protocols, systems and procedures used for protection are implemented by humans at each level, and human errors may occur. Accordingly, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate security barriers or other preventative measures, or if such measures are implemented, and even if appropriate training is conducted in support of such measures, human errors may still occur. It is virtually impossible for us to entirely mitigate this risk. A party, whether internal or external, who is able to circumvent our security measures could misappropriate information, including, but not limited to user credit card information or other sensitive and personal information, or cause interruptions or direct damage to our government portals or their users.

Under payment card rules and our contracts with our credit card processors, if there is a breach of payment card information that we store, process, or transmit, we could be liable to the payment card issuers for their cost of issuing new cards and related expenses, and to partners for costs of notification and remediation, and for any damages to users under state laws or our partner contracts. If we fail to follow Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards, we could incur significant fines imposed by the Payment Card Industry or jeopardize our ability to give customers the option of using payment cards to fund their payments or pay their fees, even if there is no compromise of personal information. In addition, if we fail to follow NACHA security requirements, we may be liable for substantial fines and penalties, cease and desist orders, and other sanctions that could restrict or eliminate our ability to provide certain of our services in one or more states or accept certain types of transactions in one or more states, or could force us to make costly changes to our business practices. If we were unable to accept payment cards or process checks electronically, our business would be negatively impacted.
 
 
12

 
 
In addition, any noncompliance with privacy laws or a security breach involving the misappropriation, loss or other unauthorized access, use or disclosure of sensitive or personal information, or other significant disruption involving our information technology networks and systems (whether or not caused by a breach of our contractual obligations or our negligence), may lead to negative publicity, impair our ability to conduct our business, or cause us to incur potentially significant liability, damages or remediation costs. It may also cause the governments with whom we contract to lose confidence in us, any of which may cause the termination or modification of our government contracts and impair our ability to win future contracts. Actual or anticipated attacks and risks may cause us to incur increasing costs, including costs to deploy additional personnel and protection technologies, to train employees, and to engage third party security experts and consultants. Our technology errors and omissions insurance may not protect against all of the costs, liabilities, and other adverse effects arising from a security breach or system failure. If we fail to reasonably maintain the security of confidential information, we may suffer significant reputational and financial losses and our results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and liquidity may be adversely affected.

Because we have outsourced portal and software development and service contracts with a limited number of governments, the termination or non-renewal of certain of these contracts may harm our business.

Currently, we have 29 portals (which includes our Connecticut portal that was awarded a three-year contract by the state of Connecticut in the first quarter of 2014 to manage the state’s government portal) through which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced portal services to state governments. These contracts typically have multi-year terms with provisions for renewals for various periods at the option of the government. However, a government typically has the option to terminate its contract prior to the expiration date if we breach a material contractual obligation and fail to cure such breach within a specified period or upon the occurrence of other events or circumstances specified in our contracts.

In addition, we currently have 15 contracts under which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced state portal services that can be terminated by the other party without cause on a specified period of notice. Collectively, revenues generated from these contracts represented 57% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. The Texas portal, which is one of the 15 contracts noted above, accounted for approximately 23% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. In the event that any of these contracts is terminated without cause, the terms of the respective contract may require the government to pay a fee to us in order to continue to use our software in its portal. Also, the contract with the FMCSA can be terminated by the other party without cause on a specified period of notice.

Furthermore, we currently have 15 contracts under which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced portal services or software development and services that have expiration dates within the 12-month period following December 31, 2013. Collectively, revenues generated from these contracts represented 38% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. Our Arizona portal contract was extended by the state of Arizona to March 26, 2014, in order for NICUSA to provide transition services in connection with the June 26, 2013 expiration of the contract. For the year ended December 31, 2013, revenues from the Arizona portal contract accounted for approximately 1% of our total consolidated revenues. If a contract is not renewed after a defined term, the government partner would be entitled to take over the portal in place with no future obligation to us, except as otherwise provided in the contract and except for the services we provide on a software-as-a-service, or SaaS, basis, which would be available to the government agency on a fee-for-service basis.

The loss of a contract with one or more states or the FMCSA, as a result of the expiration, termination, or failure to renew the contract, if not replaced, could significantly reduce our revenues and profitability. If these revenue shortfalls were to occur, our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition would be harmed. We cannot be certain if, when, or to what extent, governments might fail to renew or terminate any or all of their contracts with us.

Because we generally grant our government partners fully paid, perpetual licenses to use and modify the software and applications we develop, and such licenses continue upon a termination by them for cause or the natural expiration of our portal contracts, our government partners could elect to take over the operation and maintenance of our portal software themselves, or hire a competitor to operate and maintain our portal software. Any such decision to do so could adversely affect our revenues and profits.

After termination for cause or the natural expiration of our portal contracts, it is possible that governments and their contractors may operate the portals themselves using the perpetual use license we typically are contractually obligated to provide to them. This license generally permits the government to use and modify the software programs and other applications we have developed for them in the operation of their portals (excluding software applications that we provide on a SaaS basis) on a perpetual, royalty-free basis. This perpetual use license could make it easier and more cost effective for our customers to elect not to enter into a new contract with us after the expiration of one of our portal contracts. Any such election could adversely affect our revenues and profits. Additionally, anyone using our software programs and other applications may inadvertently allow our intellectual property or other information to fall into the hands of third parties, including our competitors. In the event that a contract is terminated prior to the natural expiration of the term without cause, the terms of the respective contract typically require the government to pay a fee to us in order to continue to use our software in its portal.
 
 
13

 
 
The growth in our revenues may be limited by the number of governments and government agencies that choose to provide eGovernment services using our business model and by the finite number of governments with which we may contract for our eGovernment services.
 
Our revenues are generated principally from contracts with state governments and government agencies within a state to provide eGovernment services on behalf of those government entities to complete transactions and distribute public information electronically. The growth in our revenues largely depends on government entities adopting our business model. We cannot assure that government entities will choose to provide eGovernment services or continue to provide eGovernment services at current levels, or that they will provide such services with private assistance or by adopting our model. Generally, under our self-funded business model, we initially generate a high proportion of our revenues from a limited number of transaction-based services we provide on behalf of a limited number of government agencies within a state, as other agencies consider participating in the portal. The failure to secure contracts with certain government agencies, particularly those agencies that control motor vehicle driver history records, could result in revenue levels insufficient to support a portal’s operations on a self-sustained, profitable basis. In addition, as there is a finite number of states remaining with which we can contract for our services, future increases in our revenues may depend, in part, on our ability to expand our business model to include multi-state cooperative organizations, local governments, and federal agencies and to broaden our service offerings to diversify our revenue streams across our lines of business. We cannot assure that we will succeed in expanding into new markets, broadening our service offerings, or that our services will be adaptable to those new markets.
 
Some government partners may require specific government legislation to be passed for us to initiate and maintain our government contracts, and any failure to pass such legislation or any repeal or modification of or successful challenge to such legislation could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Because a central part of our business includes the execution of contracts with governments under which we remit a portion of user fees charged to businesses and citizens to state agencies, it is sometimes necessary for governments to draft and adopt specific legislation before the government can circulate a request for proposal (“RFP”) to which we can respond or can otherwise award such a contract. Furthermore, the maintenance of our government contracts requires the continued acceptance of our approach, including any enabling legislation and any implementing regulations. In the past, various entities that use the portals we operate to obtain government information have challenged the authority of governments to electronically provide these services exclusively through portals like those we operate, and other parties have challenged the contract awarding process in particular instances. A successful challenge in the future could result in a proliferation of alternative ways to obtain these services, which would harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. The repeal or modification of any enabling legislation or other legal challenge would also harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

We earn a significant percentage of our revenues from a limited number of services and customers, and any reduction in demand for those services from those customers could adversely affect our results of operations.

We obtain a high proportion of our revenues from a limited number of services. A significant portion of our revenues is derived from data resellers’ use of our portals to access motor vehicle driver history records for the automobile insurance industry. Transaction-based fees charged for access to motor vehicle driver history records accounted for approximately 34% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2013. One of these data resellers, LexisNexis Risk Solutions, accounted for approximately 22% of our total consolidated revenues during this period, or approximately three-quarters of our revenues earned for access to motor vehicle driver history records. This service is expected to continue to account for a significant portion of our revenues in the near future. However, regulatory changes or the development or increased use of alternative information sources, such as credit scoring, could materially reduce our revenues from this service. Our contracts with data resellers generally may be terminated at any time after a 60-day notice and may be terminated immediately at the option of any party in certain circumstances. A reduction in revenues from currently popular services would harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

We could suffer significant losses and liability if our operations, systems or platforms are disrupted or fail to perform properly or effectively.

The continued efficiency and proper functionality of our technical systems, platforms, and operational infrastructure is integral to our performance. As we grow, we continue to purchase equipment and to upgrade our technology and network infrastructure to handle increased traffic on our Internet-based portals. We may experience occasional system interruptions and delays that make our applications and eGovernment services unavailable or slow to respond and prevent businesses and citizens from accessing information and services on our government portals. Any such interruptions or delays in the future could cause users to stop visiting our government portals and could cause our government partners to penalize us or terminate agreements with us. Our operations, systems and platforms may also be disrupted or fail due to catastrophic events such as natural disasters, telecommunications failures, power outages, cyber-attacks, terrorist attacks, or other catastrophic events. If any of these circumstances occurred, our business could be harmed.

The Internet-based services for some of our portals and applications are physically hosted individually by the state or city where we provide services on servers that we typically own or lease. Our other portals and applications are hosted at a leased Computer Data Center (“CDC”) on servers that we own with a near real-time backup CDC located in a different geographic region of the country. CDC servers are virtually segmented by government partner while housing more than one government partner’s services. An outage in one of the servers hosted outside one of the CDCs could affect that government partner’s services. An outage at both of our leased CDCs, or at one CDC and to the connection to our backup facility, could affect more than one government partner’s services. Any of these system failures could harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. Our insurance policies may not adequately compensate us for any losses that may occur due to any failures of or interruptions in our systems.
 
 
14

 
 
Our portal revenues could be harmed as a result of government budget deficits.

The majority of our portal revenues are derived from fees we charge to users for transactions conducted through our portals and share with our government partners. Budget-strapped governments may seek to reduce our transaction revenues from our self-funded business model or our profit margin on transactions, or may decide to operate the portals themselves. In addition, approximately 6% of our portal revenues in 2013 were derived from time and materials-based fees for application development and approximately 4% of our portal revenues in 2013 were derived from fixed fees for portal management services, both of which are paid directly to us by governments. In the event of budget deficits, our government clients may be required to curtail discretionary spending on such projects and our portal revenues could be harmed.

If our rate of growth continues or accelerates, we may not effectively manage our growth, which would adversely affect our business and our results of operations.

Our growth rate may continue or may accelerate if we experience increased acceptance of our services under new or existing government contracts. If we cannot manage our growth effectively, we may not be able to coordinate the activities of our technical, accounting, and marketing staffs, and our business could be harmed. As part of our growth plan, we must implement new operational procedures and internal controls to expand, train, and manage our employees and to coordinate the operations of our various subsidiaries. If we cannot successfully implement our recently awarded eGovernment contracts in a timely and cost-effective manner or effectively manage the growth of our government portals, staff, software installation and maintenance teams, offices and operations, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Our business will be adversely affected if we are unable to hire, integrate, train, or retain the qualified personnel that our business requires.

The growth in our business has resulted in an increase in the responsibilities for both existing and new management personnel. Some of our personnel are presently serving in more than one managerial capacity. Furthermore, compensation paid to executive and management personnel may not reflect market rates that could be obtained elsewhere. The loss of any of our executives or key employees could harm our business. In addition, we currently expect that we will need to hire additional personnel in all areas throughout 2014, including personnel for new operations in jurisdictions in which we may obtain contracts. We may not be able to retain our current key employees or attract, integrate, or retain other qualified employees in the future. If we do not succeed in attracting new personnel or integrating, retaining, and motivating our current personnel, our business could be harmed. In addition, new employees generally require substantial training in the presentation, policies, and positioning of our government portals and other services. This training will require substantial resources and management attention.

Because a major portion of our accounts receivable is generated from a small number of users, negative trends in their businesses could cause us significant credit loss and negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.

LexisNexis Risk Solutions and other data resellers that represent a significant portion of our business have a period of time, generally within 25 days of billing, to remit payment. As a result, we are subject to a significant concentration of credit risk that these users will not pay for their purchases. Our credit risk may increase due to liquidity or solvency issues experienced by these users. At December 31, 2013, LexisNexis Risk Solutions accounted for approximately 23% of our consolidated accounts receivable. In addition, our business is generally subject to the risk that our customers and counterparties will fail to meet their obligations when due. While we perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers, we generally do not require collateral to secure accounts receivable. If we were unable to collect a major portion of our accounts receivable, we may suffer significant losses and our results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and liquidity may be adversely affected.

Increases in credit/debit card association and automated clearing house fees may result in the loss of customers or a reduction in our earnings.

From time to time, credit/debit card and electronic check processors increase the fees (interchange and assessment fees) that they charge companies such as us. We could attempt to pass these increases along to our government client customers, but this might result in the loss of those customers. If we elect not to pass along such increased fees to our government client customers in the future, we may have to absorb all or a portion of such increases thereby increasing our operating costs and reducing our earnings.

We may suffer substantial harm to our business if our government partners are not satisfied with our services or services provided by our third-party credit/debit card or electronic check processors.

We depend to a large extent on our relationships with our government partners, our reputation for high quality professional services and our commitment to preserving public trust to attract and retain customers. Through these relationships, we estimate that we processed nearly $25 billion of credit/debit card and electronic check payments for our government partners in 2013. As a result, if one of our government partners is not satisfied with our services or services provided by our third-party credit/debit card or electronic check processors, it may be more damaging to our business than to other businesses.
 
 
15

 
 
We depend on subcontractors or the third parties with whom we partner for certain projects, deliverables, or financial transaction processes. If these parties fail to satisfy their obligations to us or we are unable to maintain these relationships, our operating results and business prospects could be adversely affected.

Certain large and complex projects and certain transactions require that we utilize subcontractors or that our services and solutions integrate with the software, systems, or infrastructure requirements of other vendors and service providers. Our ability to serve our clients and deliver and implement our solutions in a timely manner depends on our ability to retain and maintain relationships with subcontractors, vendors, and service providers and the ability of these subcontractors, vendors, and service providers to meet their obligations in a timely manner, as well as on our effective oversight of their performance. There is a risk that we may have disputes with our subcontractors arising from, among other things, the quality and timeliness of work performed by the subcontractors or customer concerns about the subcontractors. Disputes with subcontractors could lead to litigation. Adverse judgments or settlements in legal disputes may result in significant monetary damages or injunctive relief against us. In addition, if any of our subcontractors fails to perform on a timely basis the agreed-upon services, our ability to fulfill our obligations as a prime contractor may be jeopardized. Subcontractor performance deficiencies could result in the termination of our contract for default. A termination for default could expose us to liability for damages and have an adverse effect on our business prospects, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition and our ability to compete for future contracts and orders.

  We may become subject to liability under rules and standards for processing electronic direct debit payments from bank accounts and credit card payments. 

Our electronic check processing for online payments made by direct debit to a bank account is governed by rules and standards promulgated by the NACHA, an industry trade association of banking institutions and regional automated clearing house associations. Under those rules, we may become potentially liable for failing to handle transactions in accordance with those rules, or for failing to return funds within the prescribed time frame to the bank account of the person or entity disputing our authorization to debit those funds, before the dispute regarding our authorization is resolved. Our agreements with governmental agencies at the state, federal, and local levels transfer this obligation for rapid funds return during dispute resolution to the government agencies affected, but in the event that such return does not happen, we may be potentially liable notwithstanding the government’s failure, and we may not be able to obtain reimbursement from the government involved or from the individual user or entity that initiated the debit without authorization. If this were to happen, our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be adversely affected. Our credit card and electronic check processing is also subject to the applicable rules of the particular card association or clearinghouse and applicable law. Additionally, we may become subject to laws governing money transmitters and anti-money laundering for certain services we offer. If our interpretations, or those of our government partners, of any laws, rules, regulations, or standards are determined to be incorrect, we could be exposed to significant financial liability, substantial fines and penalties, cease and desist orders, and other sanctions that could restrict or eliminate our ability to provide certain of our services in one or more states or accept certain types of transactions in one or more states, or could force us to make costly changes to our business practices. Even if we are not forced to change our business practices, the costs of compliance and obtaining necessary licenses and regulatory approvals could be substantial.

We may become liable for violations of the Driver Privacy Protection Act as adopted federally or in each state.

We act as an outsourced manager on behalf of states, for electronic access to records pertaining to motor vehicles and motor vehicle operators (driver history records) by users and certain permitted resellers. These records are the largest group of records for which we process electronic access for state agencies, and are processed in the majority of our portal states. These records contain “personal information” and “sensitive personal information” as defined by the federal Driver Privacy Protection Act, and state versions of that Act adopted in every state (collectively, the “DPPA”). The DPPA regulates categories and circumstances under which “personal information” and “sensitive personal information” may be disclosed to requestors. Each state has procedures for complying with the DPPA, and such procedures may vary from state to state. We closely follow each respective state’s existing compliance procedures for general access, with our electronic access. If we fail to follow such procedures, or we grant access to users not in compliance with such procedures, or if such procedures are deemed inadequate in some way, our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be adversely affected. The DPPA permits statutory damages to be awarded to the subjects of such records, even without proof of actual damage, for certain infringements or violations of the DPPA. We may be potentially liable for such damages in such instances, and we may have no recourse against the state, or the state may not be jointly and severally liable with us.

We may become liable for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act as adopted federally.

Our PSP service for the FMCSA requires that PSP record data be disclosed in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). We may also have other online services that are or become subject to the FCRA. If we fail to follow such procedures, or we grant access to users not in compliance with such procedures, or if such procedures are deemed inadequate in some way, or if other services we offer are deemed subject to the FCRA, we may become subject to monetary fines, penalties or damages, and our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be adversely affected. The FCRA permits statutory damages to be awarded to the subjects of such records, even without proof of actual damage, for certain infringements or violations of the FCRA. In addition, any failure to comply with the FCRA may result in reputational damage.
 
 
16

 
 
We may become liable for violations of the Safe, Accountable, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users if we disclose Pre-employment Screening Program (PSP) record data improperly.

A federal law known as the Safe, Accountable, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (“SAFETEA-LU”) limits access to PSP record data to commercial driving operator applicants, their prospective employers, and the employers’ agents, and can only be used in screening applicants for employment. Because the service is only useful if data access is quick and easy, we employ sophisticated systems of online agreements and validation information gathering, plus third party verification systems, to verify the identity and bona fides of any requestor. These systems may be incomplete or contain errors or omissions, or their operation may be flawed, resulting in improper disclosure or disclosure for an improper purpose or to improper persons. If we fail to follow appropriate procedures, or we grant access to users not in compliance with such procedures, or if such procedures are deemed inadequate in some way, we may become subject to monetary fines, penalties, or damages, and our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be adversely affected. Furthermore, the magnitude of the potential number of transactions accessed through our PSP service may result in monetary damages that are correspondingly large. In addition, any failure to comply with SAFETEA-LU may result in reputational damage.

Compliance with changing regulation of corporate governance, public disclosure and other regulatory requirements or industry standards may result in additional expenses.

Changing laws, regulations, and standards relating to corporate governance, public disclosure and other regulatory requirements or industry standards, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, new SEC regulations and NASDAQ Global Select Market rules, or Payment Card Industry standards are creating uncertainty for companies such as ours. These new or changed laws, regulations, and standards are subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies, which could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We are committed to maintaining adequate and appropriate standards of corporate governance and public disclosure. As a result, our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations, and standards have resulted in, and certain regulations could continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. Further, as a result of increasing regulation, our board members and executive officers could face an increased risk of personal liability in connection with the performance of their duties. As a result, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified board members and executive officers, which could harm our business. If our efforts to comply with new or changed laws, regulations, and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities in the laws themselves or related to practice, our reputation may be harmed.

If our competitors become more successful in developing and selling products for government-managed services, then our business could be adversely affected.

The principal alternative to our model is a government-designed and managed service that utilizes other vendors’ technologies, products, and services. Companies that have expertise in marketing and providing technical electronic services to government entities compete with us by further developing their services and increasing their focus on this area of their businesses. Many of our potential competitors are national or international in scope and have greater resources than we do. These resources could enable our potential competitors to initiate severe price cuts or take other measures in an effort to gain market share. Additionally, in some geographic areas, we may face competition from smaller consulting firms with established reputations and political relationships with potential government partners. If we do not compete effectively or if we experience any pricing pressures, reduced profit margins or loss of market share resulting from increased competition, our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Our intellectual property rights are valuable and any inability to protect them could harm our company.

We regard our intellectual property as important to our success. We rely on a combination of nondisclosure and other contractual arrangements with governments, our employees, subcontractors, and other third parties, copyrights and privacy and trade secret laws to protect and limit the distribution of the proprietary applications, documentation and processes we have developed in connection with the eGovernment services we offer. Despite our precautions, third parties may succeed in misappropriating our intellectual property or independently developing similar intellectual property. If we fail to adequately protect our intellectual property rights and proprietary information or if we become involved in litigation relating to our intellectual property rights and proprietary technology, our business could be harmed. Any actions we take may not be adequate to protect our proprietary rights, and other companies may develop technologies that are similar or superior to our proprietary technology.

The fees we collect for many of our services are subject to government regulation that could limit growth of our revenues and profitability.

Under the terms of our self-funded outsourced government portal contracts, we remit a portion of the transaction fees we collect to state agencies. Generally, our contracts provide that the amount of any transaction fees we charge is set by governments to provide us with a reasonable return or profit. We have limited control over the level of transaction fees we are permitted to retain. Our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition may be harmed if the level of fees we are permitted to retain in the future is too low or if our costs rise without a commensurate increase in fees.
 
 
17

 
 
Because we have certain outsourced portal contracts that contain performance bond requirements and/or indemnification provisions, we may suffer monetary liability and damages if claims arise under such contracts. In addition, any failure to meet such obligations, whether or not a performance bond is in place, may result in reputational damage.

We are bound by performance bond commitments on certain outsourced portal contracts. Performance deficiencies by us or our subcontractors could result in a default of a performance bond, which could expose us to liability and have an adverse effect on our business prospects, on our financial condition, and on our ability to compete for future outsourced portal contracts. Further, under certain of our outsourced portal contracts, we are required to fully indemnify our government clients against claims arising from our performance or the performance of our subcontractors. If we fail to meet our contractual obligations, our performance or our subcontractors’ performance gives rise to claims, if our government partners are otherwise held liable for claims related to the services provided under our contracts, or if our government partners seek to hold us liable for claims or damages related to the services provided under our contracts, we could be subject to legal liability, monetary damages and loss of customer relationships.

Our business will suffer if we lose the right to provide access to the content filed or distributed through our outsourced portals or we are held liable for the content that we pass to users from government entities.

We do not own or create the content filed or distributed through our outsourced portals. We depend on the governments with which we contract to supply information and data feeds to us on a timely basis to allow businesses and citizens to complete transactions and obtain government information. We cannot assure that these data sources will continue to be available in the future. Government entities could terminate their contracts to provide data. Changes in regulations could mean that governments no longer collect some types of data or that the data is protected by more stringent privacy rules preventing uses now made of it. Moreover, our data sources are not always subject to exclusive agreements, so that data included in our services also may be included in those of our potential competitors. In addition, we depend upon the accuracy and reliability of government computer systems and data collection for the content distributed through our portals. The loss, unavailability, or inaccuracy of our data sources in the future, or the loss of our exclusive right to distribute some of the data sources, could harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

Because we aggregate and distribute sometimes private and sensitive public information over the Internet, we may face potential liability for defamation, libel, negligence, invasion of privacy, copyright or trademark infringement, and other claims based on the nature and content of the material that is published on or distributed through our outsourced government portals. Most of the agreements through which we obtain consent to disseminate this information do not contain indemnity provisions in our favor. These types of claims have been brought, sometimes successfully, against online services and websites in the past. We cannot assure that our general liability or errors and omissions insurance will be adequate to indemnify us for all liability that may be imposed. Any liability that is not covered by our insurance or is in excess of our insurance coverage could severely harm our business operations and financial condition.
 
Because a large portion of our business relies on a contractual bidding process whose parameters are established by governments, the length of our sales cycles is uncertain and could lead to shortfalls in our financial results for a particular period and harm our financial condition.

Our dependence on a bidding process to initiate many new projects, the parameters of which are established by governments, results in uncertainty in our sales cycles because the duration and the procedures for each bidding process vary significantly according to each government entity’s policies and procedures. The time between the date of initial contact with a government for a bid and the award of the bid may range from as little as 180 days to up to several years. The bidding process is subject to factors, over which we have little or no control, including:
 
political acceptance of the concept of government agencies contracting with third parties to receive or distribute public information, which has been offered traditionally only by the government agencies and often without charge;

the internal review process by the government agencies for bid acceptance;

the need to reach a political accommodation among various interest groups;

changes to the bidding procedure by the government agencies;

changes to state legislation authorizing government’s contracting with third parties to receive or distribute public information;

changes in government administrations;

t he budgetary restrictions of government entities;

the competition generated by the bidding process;

the possibility of cancellation or delay by the government entities; and

government’s manner of drafting bid documents, which may partially, or not at all, utilize our method of providing eGovernment services.
 
 
18

 
 
We depend on the bidding process for a significant part of our business. Therefore, any material delay in the bidding process, changes to bidding practices and policies, the failure to receive the award of a bid, or the failure to execute a contract may disrupt our financial results for a particular period and harm our financial condition.

We may need more working capital to fund operations and expand our business, and any failure to obtain such needed working capital would adversely affect our business.

We believe that our current financial resources and cash generated from operations will be sufficient to meet our present working capital and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next 12 months. However, we may need to raise additional capital before this period ends to further:
 
fund operations, if unforeseen costs or revenue shortfalls arise;

support our expansion into other states and government agencies beyond what is contemplated in 2014 if unforeseen opportunities arise;

expand our product and service offerings beyond what is contemplated in 2014 if unforeseen opportunities arise;

respond to unforeseen competitive pressures; and

acquire technologies beyond what is contemplated.

Our future liquidity and capital requirements will depend upon numerous factors, including the success of our existing and new service offerings and potentially competing technological and market developments. However, any projections of future cash flows are subject to substantial uncertainty. If current cash, lines of credit, and cash generated from operations are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity securities, issue debt securities, or draw on the unused portion of our line of credit. The sale of additional equity securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. From time to time, we expect to evaluate the acquisition of or investment in businesses and technologies that complement our various eGovernment businesses. Acquisitions or investments might affect our liquidity requirements or cause us to sell additional equity securities or issue debt securities. There can be no assurance that financing will be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. If adequate funds were not available on acceptable terms, our ability to develop or enhance our applications and services, take advantage of future opportunities, or respond to competitive pressures would be significantly limited. This limitation could harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

The seasonality of use for some of our eGovernment services may harm our quarterly results.

The use of some of our eGovernment services is seasonal, particularly the accessing of motor vehicle driver history records, resulting in lower revenues from this service under existing portal contracts in the fourth quarter of each calendar year, due to the smaller number of business days in this quarter and a lower volume of transactions during the holiday period.

Our quarterly results of operations may be volatile and difficult to predict. If our quarterly results of operations fail to meet the expectations of public market analysts or investors, the market price of our common stock may decrease significantly.

Our future revenues and results of operations may vary significantly from quarter to quarter due to a number of factors, many of which are outside of our control, and any of which may harm our business. These factors include:
 
the commencement, completion, or termination of contracts during any particular quarter;

the introduction of new eGovernment services by us or our competitors;

technical difficulties or system downtime affecting the Internet generally or the operation of our eGovernment services;

the amount and timing of operating costs and capital expenditures relating to the expansion of our business operations and infrastructure;
 
the result of negative cash flows due to capital investments; and

the incurrence of significant charges related to acquisitions.

Due to the factors noted above, our financial performance in a particular quarter may be lower than we anticipate and if we are unable to reduce spending in that quarter, our results of operations for that quarter may be harmed. One should not rely on quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our results of operations as an indication of future performance. It is possible that in some future periods our results of operations may be below the expectations of public market analysts and investors. If this occurs, the price of our common stock may decline.  
 
 
19

 
 
We may be subject to intellectual property infringement claims, which are costly to defend and could limit our ability to use certain technologies in the future.

We may become subject to claims alleging infringement of third-party intellectual property rights. Our portal contracts require us to indemnify our government partners for infringing software we build or use. Any claims could subject us to costly litigation, and may require us to pay damages and develop non-infringing intellectual property or acquire licenses to the intellectual property that is the subject of the alleged infringement. Licenses for such intellectual property may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. Litigation regarding intellectual property rights is common in the Internet and software industries. We expect third-party infringement claims involving Internet technologies and software products and services to increase. If an infringement claim is filed against us, we may be prevented from using certain technologies and may incur significant costs resolving the claim. We cannot assure that our applications and services do not infringe on the intellectual property rights of third parties. In addition, we have agreed, and expect that we may agree in the future, to indemnify certain of our customers against claims that our services infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. We could incur substantial costs in defending ourselves and our customers against infringement claims. In the event of a claim of infringement, we and our customers may be required to obtain one or more licenses from third parties. We cannot assure that we or our customers could obtain necessary licenses from third parties at a reasonable cost or at all.

We depend on technology licensed to us by third parties, and the loss of access to, or improper management of the licensing of, this technology could delay implementation of our services or force us to pay higher license fees or fines.

We license numerous third-party technologies and applications that we incorporate into our existing service offerings, and on which, in the aggregate, we are substantially dependent. There can be no assurance that the licenses for such third-party technologies will not be terminated or that we will be able to license third-party technology and applications for future services. While we do not believe that one individual technology or application we license is material to our business, changes in or the loss of third party licenses could lead to a material increase in the costs of licensing, or to our products becoming inoperable or their performance being materially reduced. The result could be that we may need to incur additional development or procurement costs in an attempt to ensure continued performance of our services, and either the cost of such undertakings or the failure to successfully complete such undertakings could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. Additionally, because of the decentralized nature of our operations, licensing of third party technology can be complex and difficult to track and continually monitor. Our inability to do so could result in fines, an increase in licensing fees, or the temporary inability to utilize the third party technology until licensing issues are resolved.

We are subject to independent audits as requested by our government customers. Deficiencies in our performance under a government contract could result in contract termination, reputational damage, or financial penalties.

Each government entity with which we contract for outsourced portal services has the authority to require an independent audit of our performance and financial management of contracted operations in each respective state. The scope of audits could include inspections of income statements, balance sheets, fee structures, collections practices, service levels, security practices, and our compliance with contract provisions and applicable laws, regulations, and standards. We cannot assure that a future audit will not find any material performance deficiencies that would result in an adjustment to our revenues and result in financial penalties. Moreover, the consequent negative publicity could harm our reputation among other governments with which we would like to contract. All of these factors could harm our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

A prolonged economic slowdown could harm our operations.

A prolonged economic slowdown or recession could materially impact our operations to the extent it results in reduced demand for Internet-based access to governmental services. In addition, it may hinder our efforts to obtain new business by distracting the attention of governments or impairing the ability of governments to hear or act upon our value proposition due to reduced personnel or turnover. These same factors may also jeopardize our renewal or rebid opportunities on existing contracts. If current market and economic conditions deteriorate, we may experience adverse impacts on our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.

Our cash could be adversely affected if any of the financial institutions in which we hold our cash fails or becomes subject to other adverse conditions in the financial or credit markets.

Our cash primarily includes cash on hand in the form of bank deposits. We maintain our cash with major financial institutions. Deposits with these financial institutions exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance limits. At December 31, 2013, the amount of cash covered by FDIC deposit insurance was $10.1 million, and $64.1 million of cash was above the FDIC deposit insurance limits. These balances could be impacted if one or more of the financial institutions with which we deposit funds fails or becomes subject to other adverse conditions in the financial or credit markets. To date, we have experienced no loss or lack of access to our invested cash; however, we can provide no assurance that access to our invested cash will not be impacted or that we will not lose deposited funds in excess of FDIC insurance limits as a result of the failure or insolvency of any these financial institutions or adverse conditions in the financial and credit markets.
 
 
20

 
 
We may be unable to integrate new technologies and industry standards effectively, which may adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Our future success will depend on our ability to enhance and improve the responsiveness, functionality, and features of our services in accordance with industry standards and to address the increasingly sophisticated technological needs of our customers on a cost-effective and timely basis. Our ability to remain competitive will depend, in part, on our ability to:

enhance and improve the responsiveness, functionality, and other features of the government portals we offer;

continue to develop our technical expertise;

develop and introduce new services, applications, and technology to meet changing customer needs and preferences; and

influence and respond to emerging industry standards and other technological changes in a timely and cost-effective manner.

We cannot assure that we will be successful in responding to the above technological and industry challenges in a timely and cost-effective manner. If we are unable to integrate new technologies and industry standards effectively, our business could be harmed.

Our strategic alliances and potential acquisitions may entail numerous risks and uncertainties which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

As part of our business strategy, we have made and may continue to enter into strategic alliances or to make acquisitions that we believe will complement our existing businesses, increase traffic to our government partners’ sites, enhance our services, broaden our software and applications offerings or technological capabilities, or increase our profitability. Future alliances or acquisitions could present numerous risks and uncertainties, including:

the inability to successfully market, distribute, deploy, and manage new products and services that we have limited or no experience in managing;

the diversion of management’s attention from our core business;

risks associated with entering markets in which we have limited or no experience; 

adverse effects on existing business relationships with existing suppliers and customers;

erosion of our brand equity in the eGovernment or financial markets;

difficulties in the assimilation of operations, personnel, technologies, and information systems of the acquired companies;

the risk that an acquired business will not perform as expected or will have profit margins significantly lower than ours;

potential loss of key employees, particularly those of acquired businesses;

potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities, which may be freely tradable in the public market;

impairment, restructuring, and other charges related to goodwill and other long-lived intangible assets; and

the incurrence of debt and related interest and other expenses.

We cannot assure that we will be able to successfully integrate products or technologies of strategic alliances or new businesses we may acquire in the future. We also may not realize cost efficiencies or synergies that we anticipate.


None.


Our principal administrative office occupies a total of approximately 29,000 square feet of leased space at 25501 West Valley Parkway, Suite 300, Olathe, Kansas 66061. All of our subsidiaries also lease their facilities. We do not own any real property and do not currently anticipate acquiring real property or buildings in the foreseeable future.
 
 
21

 
 

Litigation

We are involved from time to time in legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. However, we are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings. As discussed in Note 7 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K with respect to the prior civil action by the SEC against our Chief Financial Officer, we were not a party to the civil action, but were obligated to provide indemnification in certain circumstances (including advancing certain defense costs) to our Chief Financial Officer in accordance with our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and our indemnification agreement with him. On December 2, 2013, a federal jury of seven persons in Kansas City, Kansas, cleared our Chief Financial Officer of any liability in connection with all alleged violations brought by the SEC against him. The SEC’s right to appeal the outcome of the trial has expired and the civil action by the SEC against our Chief Financial Officer is concluded.


Not applicable.



Our common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “EGOV.” The following table shows the range of high and low sales prices reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the periods indicated.
 
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2013
 
High
   
Low
 
First Quarter
  $ 19.35     $ 15.62  
Second Quarter
    19.30       15.51  
Third Quarter
    24.15       16.68  
Fourth Quarter
    25.99       20.54  
                 
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2012
 
High
   
Low
 
First Quarter
  $ 13.81     $ 11.25  
Second Quarter
    12.70       9.95  
Third Quarter
    15.42       12.59  
Fourth Quarter
    16.83       13.58  
 
As of February 12, 2014, there were approximately 236 holders of record of shares of our common stock.
 
Dividend Policy

On October 28, 2013, our Board of Directors declared a special cash dividend of $0.35 per share, payable to stockholders of record as of November 8, 2013. The dividend, totaling approximately $23.0 million, was paid on January 2, 2014, out of our available cash.

On November 5, 2012, our Board of Directors declared a special cash dividend of $0.25 per share, payable to stockholders of record as of November 23, 2012. The dividend, totaling approximately $16.3 million, was paid on December 5, 2012, out of our available cash.

Any future determination as to the payment of dividends will be made at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our operating results, financial condition, capital requirements, general business conditions, and such other factors as our Board of Directors deems relevant.
 
 
22

 
 
Performance Graph

The performance graph below compares the annual change in our cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock during a period commencing on December 31, 2008, and ending on December 31, 2013 (as measured by dividing (i) the sum of (A) the cumulative amount of dividends for the measurement period, assuming dividend reinvestment and (B) the difference between our share price at the end and the beginning of the measurement period; by (ii) the share price at the beginning of the measurement period) with the cumulative total return of each of:  (a) the NASDAQ Composite (U.S.) Index and (b) a Peer Group, assuming a $100 investment on December 31, 2008. On February 27, 2009, we paid a special cash dividend of $0.30 per share; on February 26, 2010, we paid a special cash dividend of $0.30 per share; on December 30, 2010, we paid a special cash dividend of $0.25 per share; on January 3, 2012, we paid a special cash dividend of $0.25 per share; and on December 5, 2012, we paid a special cash dividend of $0.25 per share, all of which are included in the presentation of our performance. We did not pay any other dividends on our common stock during the period commencing on December 31, 2008, and ending on December 31, 2013. The stock price performance on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of our future price performance.

Comparison of Cumulative Total Return Among
NIC Inc., NASDAQ Composite (U.S.) Index and Peer Group
 
 
Total Return Analysis
12/31/2008
12/31/2009
12/31/2010
12/31/2011
12/31/2012
12/31/2013
NIC Inc.
$   100.00
$    210.67
$   238.75
$   327.26
$   416.06
$   633.26
NASDAQ Composite
$   100.00
$    143.89
$   168.22
$   165.19
$   191.47
$   264.84
Peer Group
$   100.00
$    133.41
$   157.67
$   189.32
$   224.70
$   295.19
 
The Peer Group consists of five companies, each with a business focus similar to that of NIC. While not all of the companies provide services exclusively to governments, the services provided are similar to those we provide. The members of the Peer Group are as follows: Towers Watson & Co (TW), Accenture, Ltd. (ACN), International Business Machines Corp. (IBM), Maximus, Inc. (MMS), and ACI Worldwide, Inc. (ACIW). Watson Wyatt Worldwide, Inc. was included in the Peer Group until January 1, 2010, when it merged with Towers Perrin to form Towers Watson & Co (TW). Official Payments Holdings, Inc. (OPAY) was included in the Peer Group until November 5, 2013, when it was acquired by ACI Worldwide, Inc.

The performance graph and related text are being furnished to and not filed with the SEC, and will not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent we specifically incorporate such information by reference into such a filing.
 
 
23

 
 
Share Repurchases

During the fourth quarter of 2013, we acquired and cancelled shares of common stock surrendered by employees to pay income taxes due upon the vesting of restricted stock or the exercise of options as follows:
 
Period
 
Total Number of
Shares Purchased
   
Average Price
Paid per Share
   
Total Number of Shares
Purchased as Part of
Publicly Announced
Plans or Programs
   
Maximum Number (or
Approximate Dollar Value)
of Shares that May Yet Be
Purchased Under the Plans
or Programs
 
October 24, 2013
    731     $ 25.16     N/A     N/A  
October 25, 2013
    233       24.90     N/A     N/A  
October 27, 2013
    129       24.90     N/A     N/A  
November 5, 2013
    276       23.34     N/A     N/A  
 

The selected financial data set forth below should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” included in this Form 10-K (amounts in thousands in the tables below, except per share data).
 
   
Year Ended December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
2011
   
2010
   
2009
 
Consolidated Statement of Income Data:
                         
Total revenues
  $ 249,279     $ 210,172     $ 180,899     $ 161,534     $ 132,886  
Operating income
    52,610       43,192       38,508       29,398       22,021  
Net income
    32,038       26,339       22,942       18,363       13,946  
Net income per share - basic
    0.49       0.40       0.35       0.28       0.22  
Net income per share - diluted
    0.49       0.40       0.35       0.28       0.22  
 
As discussed in Note 4 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, which was filed with the SEC on March 16, 2010, we acquired the then-current portal management contracts for the state of Texas (collectively, the “Acquired Texas Contracts”) in the second quarter of 2009. The Acquired Texas Contracts expired on December 31, 2009, except certain Master Work Order projects expired on August 31, 2012 and others will expire on August 31, 2014. During the third quarter of 2009, we entered into a new seven-year contract with the state of Texas to manage the state’s official government portal (the “New Texas Contract”). The New Texas Contract commenced on January 1, 2010 and runs through August 31, 2016. We did not begin earning revenues under the New Texas Contract until 2010.
 
   
December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
2011
   
2010
   
2009
 
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
                             
Total assets
  $ 179,974     $ 145,140     $ 144,354     $ 111,376     $ 123,608  
Long-term debt (includes current portion
                                       
of notes payable/capital lease obligations)
    -       -       -       -       -  
Dividends declared per share:
                                       
October 28, 2013
    0.35       -       -       -       -  
November 5, 2012
    -       0.25       -       -       -  
October 24, 2011
    -       -       0.25       -       -  
December 3, 2010
    -       -       -       0.25       -  
February 1, 2010
    -       -       -       0.30       -  
February 3, 2009
    -       -       -       -       0.30  
Total stockholders' equity
    91,936       78,924       65,077       53,270       66,559  
 
As further discussed in Note 8 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K, we declared a special cash dividend in October 2013 totaling approximately $23.0 million, which was paid out of our available cash in January 2014; we declared a special cash dividend in November 2012 totaling approximately $16.3 million, which was paid out of our available cash in December 2012; we declared a special cash dividend in October 2011 totaling approximately $16.2 million, which was paid out of our available cash in January 2012; we declared and paid a special cash dividend totaling approximately $16.2 million out of our available cash in December 2010; we declared and paid a special cash dividend totaling approximately $19.3 million out of our available cash in February 2010; and we declared and paid a special cash dividend totaling approximately $19.2 million out of our available cash in February 2009.
 
 
24

 
 

Caution about Forward-Looking Statements

Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K regarding NIC and its business, which are not current or historical facts, are “forward-looking statements” that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements of plans and objectives, statements of future economic performance or financial projections, statements regarding the planned implementation of new portal contracts, statements of assumptions underlying such statements, and statements of the Company’s or management’s intentions, hopes, beliefs, expectations, or predictions of the future. For example, statements like we “expect,” we “believe,” we “plan,” we “intend,” or we “anticipate” are forward-looking statements. Investors should be aware that our actual operating results and financial performance may differ materially from our expressed expectations because of risks and uncertainties about the future including those risks discussed in this 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

There are a number of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested or indicated by such forward-looking statements. These include, among others, NIC’s ability to successfully integrate into its operations recently awarded eGovernment contracts; NIC’s ability to implement its new portal contracts in a timely and cost-effective manner; NIC’s ability to successfully increase the adoption and use of eGovernment services; the possibility of reductions in fees or revenues as a result of budget deficits, government shutdowns, or changes in government policy; the success of the Company in renewing existing contracts and in signing contracts with new states and federal government agencies; continued favorable government legislation; NIC’s ability to develop new services; existing states and agencies adopting those new services; acceptance of eGovernment services by businesses and citizens; competition; the possibility of security breaches through cyber attacks and any resulting liability; general economic conditions; and the other factors discussed under “CAUTIONS ABOUT FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS” in Part I and “RISK FACTORS” in Part I, Item 1A of this 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Investors should read all of these discussions of risks carefully.

All forward-looking statements made in this Form 10-K speak only as of the date of this report. We will not necessarily update the information in this 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K if any forward-looking statement later turns out to be inaccurate. Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on any forward-looking statement.

What We Do – An Executive Summary

We are a leading provider of eGovernment services that help governments use the Internet to reduce internal costs, increase efficiencies, and provide a higher level of service to businesses and citizens. We accomplish this currently through two channels: our primary outsourced portal businesses and our software & services businesses.

In our primary outsourced portal business, we generally enter into contracts primarily with state and local governments to design, build, and operate Internet-based enterprise-wide portals on their behalf. We typically enter into multi-year contracts and manage operations for each government partner through separate local subsidiaries that operate as decentralized businesses with a high degree of autonomy. Our portals consist of websites and applications that we build, which allow businesses and citizens to access government information through multiple online channels, including mobile, and complete secure transactions, including applying for a permit, retrieving government records, or filing a government-mandated form or report. We help increase our government partners’ revenues by expanding the distribution of their information assets and increasing the number of financial transactions conducted with governments. We do this by marketing portal services and soliciting users to complete government-based transactions and to enter into subscriber contracts that permit users to access the portal and the government information contained therein in exchange for transactional and/or subscription user fees. We are typically responsible for funding up-front investment and ongoing operations and maintenance costs of the government portals. Our unique self-funded business model allows us to generate revenues by sharing in the fees collected from eGovernment transactions. Our partners benefit because they reduce their financial and technology risks, increase their operational efficiencies, and gain a centralized, customer-focused presence on the Internet, while businesses and citizens gain a faster, more convenient, and more cost-effective means to interact with governments.

On behalf of our government partners, we enter into separate agreements with various agencies and divisions of the government to provide specific services and to conduct specific transactions. These agreements preliminarily establish the pricing of the electronic transactions and data access services we provide and the division of revenues between the Company and the government agency. The government oversight authority must approve prices and revenue sharing agreements. We have limited control over the level of fees we are permitted to retain. Any changes made to the amount or percentage of fees retained by us, or to the amounts charged for the services offered, could materially affect the profitability of the respective contract to us. We typically own all the intellectual property in connection with the applications developed under these contracts. After completion of a defined contract term, the government partner typically receives a perpetual, royalty-free license to use the software only in its own portal. However, certain customer management, billing and payment processing software applications that we have developed and standardized centrally and that are utilized by our portal businesses, are being provided to an increasing number of our government partners on a software-as-a-service, or “SaaS,” basis, and thus would not be included in any royalty-free license. If our contract was not renewed after a defined term or if our contract was terminated by our government partner for cause, the government agency would be entitled to take over the portal in place with no future obligation of the Company, except as otherwise provided in the contract and except for the services we provide on a SaaS basis, which would be available to our partners on a fee-for-service basis. We also provide certain payment processing services on a SaaS basis to a few private sector companies and non-NIC portal states, and may continue to market these services to other entities in the future. Historically, however, revenues from these services have not been significant. In some cases, we enter into contracts to provide consulting, application development and portal management services to governments in exchange for an agreed-upon fee.
 
 
25

 
 
Our objective is to strengthen our position as the leading provider of Internet-based eGovernment services. Key strategies to achieve this objective include:

Renew all current outsourced government portal contracts – First and foremost, we will strive to obtain renewal of all currently profitable outsourced government portal contracts. As of December 31, 2013, there were 15 contracts under which we provide enterprise-wide outsourced portal services or software development and services (which excludes our Arizona portal contract under which we are currently providing transition services to the state of Arizona that will end on March 26, 2014) that have expiration dates within the 12-month period following December 31, 2013.

Win new portal contracts – A key objective of ours is to win new portal contracts with state and federal government agencies. We continue to invest in business development and marketing efforts through a combination of strategic advertising and public relations initiatives. We have responded to several active portal procurement opportunities and realized significant benefits from our investment, including contracts with new government partners in recent years. During the fourth quarter of 2012, we entered into a five-year contract with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which includes an option for the state to extend the contract up to an additional five years. During the second quarter of 2013, we were awarded a five-year contract by the state of Wisconsin, which includes an option for the government to extend the contract up to an additional five years. During the first quarter of 2014, we were awarded a three-year contract by the state of Connecticut, which includes an option for the government to extend the contract up to an additional three years.

Our goal is to continue expanding our number of government partners by leveraging our strong relationships with current government partners and our reputation for providing proven eGovernment services. We intend to continue marketing our services to new governments in state, local, and federal jurisdictions. Our expansion efforts include developing relationships and sponsors throughout an individual government entity, pursuing strategic technology alliances, making presentations at conferences of government executives with responsibility for information technology policy, and developing contacts with organizations that act as forums for discussions between these executives.

Increase transactional revenues from our existing government portals – Part of our strategy is to increase transactional revenues from our existing government portals by building new applications and services, taking successful applications and services and implementing them in our other government portal states, and increasing the adoption of existing portal applications and services within each state where we operate. We intend to accomplish this with new service offerings, increased operational focus, and expanded marketing initiatives. In addition, we will work closely with the governance authority for each of our partner portals to evaluate the pricing of new and existing services to encourage higher usage and increased revenue streams. We plan to continue our development of new secure online transactional services that enable government agencies to interact more effectively and efficiently with businesses, citizens, and other government agencies through multiple online channels, including mobile. We will continue to work with government agencies, professional associations, and other organizations to better understand the current and future needs of our customers. We will continue to work with our government partners to create awareness of the online alternatives to traditional government interaction through initiatives such as informational brochures, government voicemail recordings, and inclusion of website information on government communication materials. In addition, we will continue to update our portals to highlight new government service information provided on the portals. We plan to work with professional associations to directly and indirectly communicate to their members the potential convenience, ease of use, and other benefits of the services our portals offer.

In addition to overall portal revenue growth, which includes both organic revenue growth and growth from new portal contracts, an important financial metric that we use to gauge our success in increasing transactional revenues in our existing portal businesses is same state revenue growth. We define same state revenues as those from states in operation and generating revenues for two full periods.

Our long-term goal has been to grow same state revenues at least 10% per year. Same state portal revenues grew 14% in 2013 and 10% in 2012. Our same state revenue growth in 2013 was higher than our growth in 2012 primarily due to increased same state non-DMV, transaction-based revenues. Non-DMV, transaction-based revenues consist of transaction fees generated by means other than from providing electronic access to motor vehicle driver history, or DMV, records. As non-DMV, transaction-based revenues continue to become a larger component of overall portal revenues, our growth in same state non-DMV, transaction-based revenues becomes more important to our overall growth as a company. Same state non-DMV, transaction-based revenues grew 27% in 2013 compared to 19% in 2012. As further discussed below, the increase in the same state non-DMV, transaction-based revenue growth rate in 2013 was primarily due to the deployment and increased adoption of key revenue generating services in certain portals, including a motor vehicle inspection service with the Texas Department of Public Safety (“DPS”), which was in operation for a full year in 2013 compared to four months in the prior year following its launch in September 2012.
 
 
26

 
 
Growth in DMV transaction-based revenues is also an important factor in our goals for overall same state revenue growth. Historically, DMV price increases have been relatively infrequent, and our ability to grow same state DMV revenues has been limited, as such revenues have been   driven by broader economic factors outside of our control. Absent DMV price increases, same state DMV revenue growth has historically ranged from flat to 1% per year. Same state DMV revenues increased by 5% in 2013 and decreased by 1% in 2012. As further discussed below, the increase in the same state DMV transaction-based revenue growth rate in 2013 was mainly due to an increase in transaction volumes at our Texas portal, among several others.

Continue to grow profitability – In addition to driving same state revenue growth, part of our strategy is to increase profitability by driving cost containment efforts throughout the Company and maintaining a lean organizational structure that fosters entrepreneurial decision-making and innovation, and accentuates the financial leverage of our business model.
 
An important financial metric that we use to gauge our portal profitability is portal gross profit percentage, or gross profit rate, which is calculated by dividing portal gross profit (portal revenues minus cost of portal revenues, excluding depreciation and amortization) by portal revenues. Our portal gross profit rate was 39% in 2013 and 38% in both 2012 and 2011. We carefully monitor our portal gross profit percentage to strike the balance between generating a solid return for our stockholders and delivering value to our government partners through reinvestment in our portal operations (which we believe also benefits our stockholders). As further discussed below, the increase in the portal gross profit rate in 2013 was mainly due to higher same state revenue growth and higher revenues from our newer portals in Oregon and Maryland, and was partially offset by start-up dilution from our new Pennsylvania and Wisconsin portals.
 
We also view selling & administrative costs, expressed as a percentage of total consolidated revenues, to be an important indicator of the relative year-over-year growth in our corporate level expenses. Selling & administrative costs as a percentage of total consolidated revenues were 16% in all periods presented.

Finally, our consolidated operating income margin (operating income divided by total consolidated revenues) is an important measure of our overall profitability. This metric was 21% in 2013, 20% in 2012, and 21% in 2011. The increase in our 2013 consolidated operating income margin was primarily attributable to an increase in portal gross profits, which was primarily driven by same state revenue growth, and an increase in software & services gross profits, due mainly to strong results from our contract with the FMCSA to operate the PSP and a new construction lien service in North Carolina, which commenced in April 2013. The decrease in our 2012 consolidated operating income margin was primarily attributable to start-up costs from our Oregon portal.

Overview of Business Models and Revenue Recognition

We classify our revenues and cost of revenues into two categories: (1) portal and (2) software & services. The portal category includes revenues and cost of revenues primarily from our subsidiaries operating state and local government portals on an outsourced basis. The software & services category primarily includes revenues and cost of revenues from our subsidiaries that provide software development and services, other than enterprise-wide outsourced portal services, to state and local governments as well as federal agencies. We currently earn revenues from three main sources: transaction-based fees, time and materials-based fees for application development, and fixed fees for portal management services. Each of these revenue types and the corresponding business models are further described below.
 
Our outsourced portal businesses

We categorize our portal revenues according to the underlying source of revenue. A brief description of each category follows:

DMV transaction-based : these are transaction fees for providing electronic access to motor vehicle driver history records, referred to as DMV records, from our state portals to data resellers, insurance companies, and other pre-authorized customers on behalf of our state partners, and are generally recurring.

Non-DMV transaction-based : these are transaction fees from sources other than providing electronic access to DMV records, for transactions conducted by business users and consumer users through our portals, and are generally recurring. For a representative listing of non-DMV services we currently offer through our portals, refer to Part I, Item 1 in this Form 10-K.
 
Portal management : these are revenues from the performance of fixed fee portal management services for our government partners in the states of Arizona, Indiana, and Delaware and are generally recurring.
 
Portal software development : these are revenues from the performance of application development projects and other time and materials services for our government partners. While we actively market these services, they do not have the same degree of predictability as our transaction-based or portal management revenues. As a result, these revenues are excluded from our recurring portal revenue percentage.
 
 
27

 
 
The highest volume, most commercially valuable service we offer is electronic access to DMV records. This service accounted for approximately 34%, 34%, and 36% of our total consolidated revenues in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively. We believe that while this service will continue to be an important source of revenue, its contribution as a percentage of total consolidated revenues on an individual portal basis will decline modestly as other sources grow. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, which resells these records to the auto insurance industry, accounted for approximately 22%, 23%, and 28%, of total consolidated revenues in 2013, 2012, 2011, respectively. In addition, we offer a service in several of our states for online motor vehicle registration and licensing. This service accounted for approximately 13% and 10%, respectively, of our total consolidated revenues in 2013 and 2012, and it accounted for less than 10% of our total consolidated revenues in 2011.

In our outsourced portal businesses for 2013, DMV transaction-based revenues represented approximately 36% of portal revenues, non-DMV transaction-based revenues represented approximately 54%, portal software development revenues represented approximately 6%, and portal management revenues represented approximately 4%. Approximately 75% of our transaction-based revenues related to business-to-government transactions, with 25% related to citizen-to-government transactions.

Transaction-based revenues from our outsourced state portal business units are highly correlated to state population, but are also affected by pricing policies established by government entities for public records, the number and growth of commercial enterprises, and the government entity’s development of policy and information technology infrastructure supporting electronic government.

LexisNexis Risk Solutions and other data resellers and companies who access DMV records have entered into contracts with the portals our subsidiaries operate to request these records from the various states with which we have contracts. Under the terms of these contracts, we provide data resellers with driver’s license and traffic records that vary by contract, for fees that currently range from $2.00 to $27.50 per record requested.   The fees charged to all entities that access DMV records are the same for records of a particular state. We typically collect the entire fee, of which a certain portion is remitted to the state by statute. These contracts are generally self-renewing until canceled by one side or the other, and generally may be terminated at any time after a 60-day notice. These contracts may be terminated immediately at the option of any party upon a material breach of the contract by the other party. Furthermore, these contracts are immediately terminable if the state statute allowing for the public release of these records is repealed.

We charge for electronic access to records on a per-record basis and, depending upon government policies, also on a fixed or sliding scale bulk basis. Our fees are set by negotiation with the government agencies that control the records and are typically approved by a government sanctioned oversight authority. Generally, our contracts provide that the amount of any fees we retain is set by governments to provide us with a reasonable return or profit. We have limited control over the level of fees we are permitted to retain. We recognize revenues from transactions (primarily transaction-based information access fees and filing fees) on an accrual basis net of the transaction fee due to the government, and we bill end-user customers primarily on a monthly basis. We typically receive a majority of payments via electronic funds transfer and credit/debit card within 25 days of billing and remit payment to governments within 30 to 45 days of the transaction. The costs that we pay state agencies for data access are accrued as accounts receivable and accounts payable at the time revenue from the access of public information is recognized. We typically must remit a certain amount or percentage of these fees to government agencies regardless of whether we ultimately collect the fees. The pricing of transactions varies by the type of transaction and by state.

We expense as incurred all employee costs to start up, operate, and maintain outsourced government portals as costs of performance under the contracts because, after the completion of a defined contract term, the government entity with which we contract typically receives a perpetual, royalty-free license to the applications we developed, except applications provided on a SaaS basis. Such costs are included in cost of portal revenues in the consolidated statements of income.

Our software & services businesses

NIC Technologies currently earns a significant portion of its revenues from its contract with the FMCSA to develop and manage the PSP for motor carriers nationwide, using a self-funded, transaction-based business model. NIC Technologies recognizes revenues from this contract (primarily transaction-based information access fees) when the services are provided. NIC Technologies also earns a portion of its revenues from fixed fee and time and materials application development and outsourced maintenance contracts with other government agencies and recognizes revenues as services are provided.

Critical Accounting Policies

Many estimates and assumptions involved in the application of generally accepted accounting principles have a material impact on our reported financial condition and operating performance and on the comparability of such reported information over different reporting periods. A critical accounting policy is one which is both important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and requires management’s most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates and assumptions about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K. We have identified the policies below as critical to our business operations and the understanding of our results of operations. Note that the preparation of our consolidated financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ from those estimates.
 
 
28

 
 
  Uncertain Tax Positions

The application of income tax law is inherently complex. Laws and regulations in this area are voluminous and are often ambiguous. We are also subject to periodic audits by government tax authorities of our income tax returns. We are required to make many subjective assumptions and judgments regarding our income tax exposures. Interpretations of and guidance surrounding income tax laws and regulations change over time. Changes in our subjective assumptions and judgments can materially affect amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets and statements of income. See Notes 2 and 9 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K for additional detail on our uncertain tax positions.

Deferred Income Taxes

We recognize deferred income taxes for the tax consequences in future years of differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each year-end based on enacted laws and statutory rates applicable in each tax jurisdiction to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. We are required to make many subjective assumptions and judgments in determining deferred income tax assets and liabilities. Changes in our assumptions and judgments can materially affect amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets and statements of income. For additional discussion of deferred income taxes, see Notes 2 and 9 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K.

Stock-based Compensation

We measure stock-based compensation cost for service-based restricted stock awards at the grant date based on the calculated fair value of the award, and recognize an expense over the employee’s requisite service period (generally the vesting period of the grant). We measure stock-based compensation cost for performance-based restricted stock awards at the date of grant, based on the fair value of shares expected to be earned at the end of the performance period, and recognize an expense over the performance period based upon the probable number of shares expected to vest. We also estimate and exclude compensation cost related to awards not expected to vest based upon estimated forfeitures. Measuring stock-based compensation cost of restricted stock awards requires judgment, including estimating the probable number of shares expected to vest. In addition, estimating the number of performance-based restricted stock awards expected to be earned is dependent on our expectations of future operating results over a specified performance period in relation to specified performance criteria. Changes in our subjective assumptions and judgments can materially affect amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets and statements of income. See Note 10 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K for additional detail on our stock-based compensation.

Financial Analysis of Years Ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011

In this section, we are providing more detailed information about our operating results and changes in financial position over the past three years. This section should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes included in this Form 10-K.

Due to the expiration of Virginia Interactive’s contract with the Commonwealth of Virginia on August 31, 2013, the operating results for our legacy Virginia portal have been removed from the same state category for the year ended December 31, 2013 as the portal no longer meets the definition of a same state portal (portals in operation and generating revenues for two full periods).

Results of Operations
 
Key Financial Metrics
 
2013
   
2012
   
2011
 
Revenue growth - outsourced portals
  19%     17%     10%  
Same state revenue growth - outsourced portals
  14%     10%     8%  
Recurring portal revenue as a % of total portal revenues
  94%     92%     91%  
Gross profit % - outsourced portals
  39%     38%     38%  
Revenue growth - software & services
  20%     11%     67%  
Gross profit % - software & services
  69%     66%     62%  
Selling & administrative expenses as a % of total revenues
  16%     16%     16%  
Operating income margin % (operating income as a % of total revenues)
  21%     20%     21%  
 
 
29

 
 
PORTAL REVENUES. In the analysis below, we have categorized our portal revenues according to the underlying source of revenue (in thousands), with the corresponding percentage increase or decrease from the prior year period.
 
Portal Revenue Analysis
 
2013
   
% Change
   
2012
   
% Change
   
2011
 
DMV transaction-based
  $ 83,671     18%     $ 70,896     9%     $ 64,985  
Non-DMV transaction-based
    127,898     26%       101,216     24%       81,313  
Portal software development
    13,309     (20%)       16,660     7%       15,515  
Portal management
    10,305     7%       9,643     14%       8,463  
Total
  $ 235,183     19%     $ 198,415     17%     $ 170,276  
 
Portal revenues for 2013 increased 19%, or approximately $36.8 million, over 2012. Of this increase, (i) 14%, or approximately $27.0 million, was attributable to an increase in same state portal revenues (portals in operation and generating revenues for two full periods); and (ii) 5%, or approximately $9.8 million, was attributable to increases of $11.8 million from our newer portals, including Pennsylvania, which began generating revenues under the self-funded model in October 2013, as further discussed below; Wisconsin, which began generating revenues in September 2013; Oregon, which began generating revenues in June 2012; and Maryland, which began generating revenues in May 2012; partially offset by a $2.0 million decrease in portal revenues from our legacy Virginia portal due to the contract expiration on August 31, 2013, as further discussed above. As further discussed in Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K, we elected not to pursue collection of approximately $5.1 million of outstanding accounts receivable from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for eGovernment services provided from January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013, and recorded a non-cash pre-tax charge in cost of portal revenues of approximately $5.1 million (approximately $0.05 per share on an after-tax basis) in the third quarter of 2013 to write-off amounts due from the Commonwealth through June 30, 2013. We did not recognize revenue under the contract subsequent to June 30, 2013, until the contract became self-funded in October 2013.

Same state portal revenues in 2013 increased 14%, or approximately $27.0 million, over 2012 due to increased revenues from our Texas, New Jersey and Colorado portals, among others. Our same state revenue growth in 2013 was higher than the 10% revenue growth we achieved in 2012 due mainly to higher same state non-DMV transaction-based revenue growth of 27% and, to a lesser extent, higher same state DMV transaction-based revenue growth of 5%, offset partially by a 20% decrease in same state portal software development revenues. The increase in non-DMV transaction-based revenues in 2013 was attributable to strong performance from several key applications, including tax filings and motor vehicle registrations in New Jersey and Texas, court record searches in Colorado and Texas, and the motor vehicle inspection service for the Texas DPS as part of the DPS Direct suite of services that we are implementing for the DPS. Our same state non-DMV transaction-based revenue growth was 19% in 2012. The increase in same state DMV transaction-based revenues in 2013 was mainly due to an increase in transaction volumes at our Texas portal, among others, and to a lesser extent, a DMV price increase at a medium sized portal that became effective in the third quarter of 2013. Same state DMV transaction-based revenue decreased 1% in 2012. Absent DMV price increases, same state DMV revenue growth has historically ranged from flat to 1% per year. We believe our DMV revenues in 2012 were negatively affected by weak broader macroeconomic conditions. Our same state portal software development revenue decreased 20% in 2013 as compared to a 5% increase in 2012, primarily due to the expiration of certain Master Work Order projects in Texas on August 31, 2012, as previously disclosed.

Portal revenues for 2012 increased 17%, or approximately $28.1 million, over 2011. Of this increase, (i) 10%, or approximately $15.8 million, was attributable to an increase in same state portal revenues (portals in operation and generating revenues for two full periods); and (ii) 7%, or approximately $12.3 million, was attributable to increases from newer portals, including Maryland, which began generating revenues in May 2012; Oregon, which began generating revenues in June 2012; Delaware, which began generating revenues in October 2011; Mississippi, which began generating revenues in May 2011; and New Jersey, which began generating revenues in April 2011.
 
Same state portal revenues in 2012 increased 10%, or approximately $15.8 million, over 2011 due to increased revenues from our Texas, Montana, Indiana, Hawaii and Colorado portals, among others. Our same state revenue growth in 2012 was driven mainly by same state non-DMV transaction-based revenue growth of 19% and same state portal software development revenue growth of 5%, which was partially offset by a 1% decrease in same state DMV transaction-based revenues. The increase in non-DMV transaction-based revenues in 2012 was attributable to strong performance from several key applications, including a motor vehicle inspection service with the Texas DPS as part of the DPS Direct suite of services launched in September 2012, payment processing, motor vehicle registrations, and tax filings.
 
 
30

 
 
COST OF PORTAL REVENUES. In the analysis below, we have categorized our cost of portal revenues between fixed and variable costs (in thousands), with the corresponding percentage increase or decrease from the prior year period. Fixed costs include costs such as employee compensation (including stock-based compensation), provision for losses on accounts receivable, subcontractor labor costs, telecommunication, and all other costs associated with the provision of dedicated client service such as dedicated facilities. Variable costs consist of costs that vary with our level of portal revenues and primarily include bank fees required to process credit/debit card and automated clearinghouse transactions and, to a lesser extent, costs associated with revenue share arrangements with our state partners.
 
Cost of Portal Revenue Analysis
 
2013
   
% Change
   
2012
   
% Change
   
2011
 
Fixed costs
  $ 94,615     18%     $ 80,046     21%     $ 66,172  
Variable costs
    48,439     11%       43,523     13%       38,558  
Total
  $ 143,054     16%     $ 123,569     18%     $ 104,730  
 
Cost of portal revenues in 2013 increased 16%, or approximately $19.5 million, over 2012. Of this increase, (i) 9%, or approximately $10.7 million, was attributable to an increase in same state cost of portal revenues; and (ii) 7%, or approximately $8.8 million, was attributable to increases of $9.8 million in our newer portals in Wisconsin, Oregon, Maryland and Pennsylvania, including a $5.1 million accounts receivable write-off for amounts we elected not to pursue from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as further discussed above and in Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements; partially offset by a $1.0 million decrease in cost of portal revenues at our legacy Virginia portal due to the contract expiration on August 31, 2013, as further discussed above.

The increase in same state cost of portal revenues in 2013 was partially attributable to higher employee compensation and benefit costs across various portals and certain costs related to the motor vehicle inspection service as part of the Texas DPS, as further discussed above. In addition, the increase in 2013 was partially attributable to an increase in variable costs to process credit/debit card transactions, due mainly to higher transaction volumes from our portals in Texas, New Jersey and Colorado, among others. A significant percentage of our non-DMV transaction-based revenues are generated from online applications whereby users pay for information or transactions via credit/debit cards. We typically earn a percentage of the credit/debit card transaction amount, but also must pay an associated interchange fee to the bank that processes the credit/debit card transaction. We earn a lower gross profit percentage on these transactions as compared to our other non-DMV applications. However, we plan to continue to implement these services as they contribute favorably to our operating income growth.

Cost of portal revenues in 2012 increased 18%, or approximately $18.8 million, over 2011.  Of this increase, (i) 8%, or approximately $8.8 million, was attributable to an increase in same state cost of portal revenues; and (ii) 10%, or approximately $10.0 million, was attributable to our newer portals in Maryland, Oregon, Delaware, Mississippi and New Jersey.

 The increase in same state cost of portal revenues in 2012 was partially attributable to higher employee compensation and benefit costs across various portals and certain nonrecurring costs in Texas associated with the implementation of the motor vehicle inspection service for the Texas DPS. In addition, the increase in 2012 was partially attributable to an increase in variable fees to process credit/debit card transactions, particularly from our portals in Texas, Indiana, Montana and Colorado, among others.

Our portal gross profit percentage was 39% in 2013, up from 38% in both 2012 and 2011, due mainly to higher same state revenue growth and higher revenues from our newer portals in Oregon and Maryland, partially offset by start-up dilution from our Pennsylvania and Wisconsin portals (collectively, $3.4 million), as further discussed above. We carefully monitor our portal gross profit percentage to strike the balance between generating a solid return for our stockholders and delivering value to our government partners through reinvestment in our portal operations (which we believe also benefits our stockholders).

SOFTWARE & SERVICES REVENUES. In the analysis below, we have categorized our software & services revenues by business (in thousands), with the corresponding percentage increase or decrease from the prior year period.
 
Software & Services Revenue Analysis
 
2013
   
% Change
   
2012
   
% Change
   
2011
 
NIC Technologies
  $ 10,611     5%     $ 10,061     10%     $ 9,174  
Other
    3,485     105%       1,697     17%       1,449  
Total
  $ 14,096     20%     $ 11,758     11% %   $ 10,623  
 
Software & services revenues increased 20% and 11%, or approximately $2.3 million and $1.1 million, in 2013 and 2012, respectively, due mainly to (i) higher revenues of $1.1 million and $1.5 million in 2013 and 2012, respectively, from our contract with the FMCSA as a result of increased adoption of the PSP compared to prior periods; and (ii) a new construction lien service in North Carolina which commenced in April 2013 and generated approximately $1.2 million of revenues in 2013.

COST OF SOFTWARE & SERVICES REVENUES. Cost of software & services revenues increased 8%, or approximately $0.3 million, in 2013 due mainly to the launch of the new construction lien service in North Carolina, as further discussed above. Cost of software & services revenues were flat in 2012. Our software & services gross profit percentage was 69%, 66% and 62% in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our software and services gross profit percentage increased in 2013 due mainly to higher revenues from the PSP and our new construction lien service in North Carolina, as described above. Our software and services gross profit percentage increased in 2012 due primarily to higher revenues from the PSP, as described above.
 
 
31

 
 
SELLING & ADMINISTRATIVE. Selling & administrative expenses in 2013 increased 25%, or approximately $8.1 million, over 2012. The increase was due mainly to (i) higher net costs related to the previously disclosed SEC matter, as further described below; (ii) higher management incentive compensation as a result of our strong operating results in 2013; and (iii) higher personnel and software and maintenance costs to support and enhance our corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure as a result of our growth.

As discussed in Note 7 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K, throughout 2013 we continued to incur obligations to advance legal fees and other expenses to our Chief Financial Officer in connection with the previously disclosed civil action by the SEC against him. We were not a party to the civil action, but were obligated to provide indemnification in certain circumstances (including advancing certain defense costs) to our Chief Financial Officer in accordance with our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and our indemnification agreement with him. Our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance carrier agreed to reimburse us for certain reasonable costs of defense advanced by us to our Chief Financial Officer in the SEC civil action, subject to the policy limits of the applicable insurance policy. During the fourth quarter of 2013, the policy limits of our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance were reached for claims related to the SEC matter and, therefore, we will not be entitled to any further reimbursements from our insurance carrier in excess of the limits. We do not currently expect to incur any additional costs related to the SEC matter in 2014.

On December 2, 2013, a federal jury of seven persons in Kansas City, Kansas, cleared our Chief Financial Officer of any liability in connection with all alleged violations of certain provisions of the federal securities laws in the civil action brought by the SEC against him. The SEC’s right to appeal the outcome of the trial has expired and the civil action against our Chief Financial Officer is concluded.

Selling & administrative expenses in 2013 included approximately $12.8 million of legal fees and other third-party costs related to the previously disclosed SEC matter. These expenses were reduced by approximately $8.8 million of reimbursement from our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance carrier, resulting in a net expense of approximately $4.0 million related to the SEC matter for 2013. In 2012, we incurred approximately $4.5 million of legal fees and other third-party costs related to the SEC matter. These expenses were reduced by approximately $4.0 million of insurance reimbursement resulting in a net expense of approximately $0.5 million for 2012. In 2011, we incurred approximately $4.2 million of legal fees and other third-party costs related to the SEC matter and the related derivative action. These expenses were reduced by approximately $4.5 million of insurance reimbursement and approximately $0.2 million of reimbursement from Jeffery S. Fraser, our former Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, related to the settlement of a derivative action, resulting in a net decrease in expense of approximately $0.5 million for 2011.

In 2013, legal fees and other third-party costs related to the SEC matter, net of insurance and other reimbursements, increased approximately $3.5 million from 2012 as described above, while other selling & administrative expenses increased by approximately $4.6 million, due mainly to higher management incentive compensation as a result of our strong operating results in 2013 and higher personnel and software and maintenance costs to support and enhance our corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure as a result of our growth. In 2012, legal fees and other third-party costs related to the SEC matter and derivative action, net of insurance and other reimbursements, increased approximately $1.0 million from 2011 as described above, while other selling & administrative expenses increased by approximately $3.1 million, due mainly to higher personnel and software and maintenance costs to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology, security and portal operations.

As a percentage of total consolidated revenues, selling & administrative expenses were 16% in all periods presented.

DEPRECIATION & AMORTIZATION. Depreciation & amortization expense in 2013 increased 32%, or approximately $2.0 million, over 2012. This increase was primarily attributable to (i) capital expenditures to implement the motor vehicle inspection service for the Texas DPS as part of the DPS Direct suite of services, which launched in September 2012; and (ii) capital expenditures for our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure. Depreciation & amortization expense in 2012 increased 38%, or approximately $1.7 million, over 2011. This increase was primarily attributable to (i) capital expenditures to implement the motor vehicle inspection service for the Texas DPS as part of the DPS Direct suite of services; (ii) capital expenditures for our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure; and (iii) capital expenditures for new state portal contracts.

As a percentage of total consolidated revenues, depreciation & amortization was 3% in all periods presented. We will continue to make key information technology infrastructure and security investments to support the long-term expansion of our portal business.

INCOME TAXES. Our effective tax rate was approximately 39% in 2013 and 2012, and 40% in 2011. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (the “Act”) was signed into law. The Act retroactively extended the federal research and development credit under Internal Revenue Code Section 41, which previously expired at the end of 2011, through the end of 2013. In accordance with authoritative accounting guidance, we recognized the impact of this legislation for the 2012 tax year in 2013, when the Act was signed into law. For the 2013 tax year, we recognized a favorable benefit related to the federal research and development tax credit totaling approximately $0.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, which was recognized in 2013, and approximately $0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2013.
 
 
32

 
 
Our effective tax rate for 2012 was lower than the rate in 2011 due to several factors, including the favorable outcome of an Internal Revenue Service examination and the related decrease in the liability for uncertain tax positions, along with changes in state taxes primarily due to a change in apportionment methodology for certain states.  

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Operating Activities

Net cash provided by operating activities was $40.9 million in 2013 compared to $28.4 million in 2012. The increase in cash flow from operations in 2013 was primarily the result of (i) a year-over-year increase in operating income, excluding non-cash charges for depreciation & amortization, the provision for losses on accounts receivable, including the write-off of the $5.1 million Pennsylvania receivable, and stock-based compensation; and (ii) a year-over-year increase in other long-term liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits associated with changes in our state taxes primarily due to a change in apportionment methodology for certain states.

Net cash provided by operating activities was $28.4 million in 2012 compared to $30.6 million in 2011. The decrease in cash flow from operations was primarily the result of (i) a year-over-year increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets, due mainly to the timing of estimated income tax payments and amounts receivable from our directors’ and officers’ liability insurance carrier; and (ii) a reduction of accounts payable in 2012 (as opposed to an increase in accounts payable in 2011) due to the timing of payments to certain government partners. These reductions to cash flow from operations were partially offset by a year-over-year increase in operating income, excluding non-cash charges for depreciation & amortization and stock-based compensation, and a smaller increase in accounts receivable in 2012 due to the timing of collections related to tax filing applications in 2011.

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities of $8.2 million in 2013 primarily consisted of $6.7 million of capital expenditures, which were for normal fixed asset additions in our outsourced portal businesses including additional capital expenditures in our new state portals and in our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure, including Web servers, purchased software, and office equipment.

Net cash used in investing activities of $13.5 million in 2012 primarily consisted of $12.8 million of capital expenditures, which were for (i) fixed asset additions and capital expenditures to implement the motor vehicle inspection service for the Texas DPS; and (ii) normal fixed asset additions in our outsourced portal businesses including additional capital expenditures in our new state portals and in our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance our corporate-wide information technology and security infrastructure, including Web servers, purchased software, and office equipment.

Net cash used in investing activities of $6.6 million in 2011 primarily consisted of $6.1 million of capital expenditures, which were for normal fixed asset additions in our outsourced portal businesses including additional capital expenditures in our new state portals and in our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology security, including Web servers, purchased software, and office equipment.

In addition, in 2013, 2012 and 2011, we capitalized approximately $1.5 million, $0.7 million and $0.5 million, respectively, of internal-use software development costs relating to the standardization of customer management, billing and payment processing systems that support our portal operations and accounting systems. The increase in 2013 reflects software development costs for certain centrally developed and standardized customer management, billing, and payment processing software applications that we are providing to an increasing number of our government partners on a SaaS basis.

Financing Activities

Net cash used in financing activities of $20.8 million in 2013 reflects the classification of $23.0 million of our available cash as restricted to pay the $0.35 per share special cash dividend we declared on October 28, 2013, which was paid on January 2, 2014. Financing activities in 2013 also reflect the receipt of $0.9 million from our employee stock purchase program and tax deductions of approximately $1.3 million related to stock-based compensation (see Note 10 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K).

Net cash used in financing activities of $14.2 million in 2012 reflects the payment of a $16.3 million special cash dividend, partially offset by $0.8 million in proceeds from our employee stock purchase program and tax deductions of approximately $1.4 million related to stock-based compensation.

Net cash used in financing activities of $14.1 million in 2011 reflects the classification of $16.2 million of our available cash as restricted to pay the $0.25 per share special cash dividend we declared on October 24, 2011, which was paid on January 3, 2012. Financing activities in 2011 also reflect tax deductions of approximately $1.5 million related to stock-based compensation and the receipt of $0.7 million from our employee stock purchase program.
 
 
33

 
 
Liquidity

We recognize revenue primarily from providing outsourced government portal services net of the transaction fees due to the government when the services are provided. We recognize accounts receivable at the time these services are provided, and also accrue the related fees that we must remit to the government as accounts payable at such time. As a result, trade accounts receivable and accounts payable reflect the gross amounts outstanding at the balance sheet dates. Gross billings for the three-months ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 were approximately $833.4 million and $1.1 billion, respectively. We calculate days sales outstanding by dividing trade accounts receivable at the balance sheet date by gross billings for the period and multiplying the resulting quotient by the number of days in that period. Days sales outstanding for the three-month periods ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was six and five days, respectively.

We believe our working capital and current ratio are important measures of our short-term liquidity. Working capital, defined as current assets minus current liabilities, increased to $79.4 million at December 31, 2013, from $65.0 million at December 31, 2012. The increase in our working capital is primarily due to operating income generated from our operations, excluding non-cash charges, as further described above. Our current ratio, defined as current assets divided by current liabilities, was 2.0 at both December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. Excluding cash restricted for the payment of dividend and the related dividend payable at December 31, 2013, our current ratio would have been 2.3 at December 31, 2013.

At December 31, 2013, our unrestricted cash balance was $74.2 million compared to $62.4 million at December 31, 2012. We believe that our currently available liquid resources and cash generated from operations will be sufficient to fund our operating requirements, capital expenditure requirements, current growth initiatives, and dividend payments, if any, for at least the next 12 months without the need of additional capital. We have a $10.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility with a bank that is available to finance working capital, issue letters of credit and finance general corporate purposes. We can obtain letters of credit in an aggregate amount of $5.0 million, which reduces the maximum amount available for borrowing under the facility. In total, we had $3.4 million in available capacity to issue additional letters of credit and $8.4 million of unused borrowing capacity at December 31, 2013 under the facility. We were in compliance with all of the financial covenants under the revolving credit facility at December 31, 2013.

We issue letters of credit as collateral for certain office leases, and to a lesser extent, as collateral for performance on certain of our outsourced government portal contracts. These irrevocable letters of credit are generally in force for one year. Letters of credit may have an expiration date of up to one year beyond the May 1, 2015 expiration date of the credit agreement. We had unused outstanding letters of credit totaling approximately $1.6 million at December 31, 2013. We are not currently required to cash collateralize these letters of credit.

At December 31, 2013, we were bound by performance bond commitments totaling approximately $6.1 million on certain outsourced government portal contracts. We have never had any defaults resulting in draws on performance bonds. Had we been required to post 100% cash collateral at December 31, 2013 for the face value of all performance bonds, letters of credit, and our line of credit in conjunction with a corporate credit card agreement, unrestricted cash would have decreased by approximately $8.7 million and would have been classified as restricted cash.

We currently expect our capital expenditures to be approximately $6.5 million to $7.0 million in fiscal 2014, which we intend to fund from our cash flows from operations and existing cash reserves. This estimate includes capital expenditures for normal fixed asset additions in our outsourced portal businesses and in our centralized hosting environment to support and enhance corporate-wide information technology security, including Web servers, purchased software, and office equipment.

On October 28, 2013, we declared a $0.35 per share special cash dividend totaling approximately $23.0 million that was paid out of our available cash on January 2, 2014. We do not believe that this dividend will have a significant effect on our future liquidity.

We may need to raise additional capital within the next 12 months to further:

fund operations if unforeseen costs arise;

support our expansion into other states and government agencies beyond what is contemplated if unforeseen opportunities arise;

expand our product and service offerings beyond what is contemplated if unforeseen opportunities arise;

respond to unforeseen competitive pressures; and

acquire technologies beyond what is contemplated.

Any projections of future earnings and cash flows are subject to substantial uncertainty. If our cash generated from operations and the unused portion of our line of credit are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity securities or issue debt securities. The sale of additional equity securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. There can be no assurance that financing will be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all.
 
 
34

 
 
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations

We do not have off-balance sheet arrangements that are not recorded or disclosed in our financial statements. The following table sets forth our future contractual obligations and commercial commitments as of December 31, 2013 (in thousands):

         
Payments Due by Period
 
         
Less than 1
               
More than
 
Contractual Obligations
 
Total
   
Year
   
1-3 Years
   
3-5 Years
   
5 Years
 
Operating lease obligations
  $ 13,230     $ 4,078     $ 5,817     $ 3,031     $ 304  
Income tax uncertainties
    1,760       -       1,760       -       -  
Long-term debt obligations
    -       -       -       -       -  
Capital lease obligations
    -       -       -       -       -  
Purchase obligations
    -       -       -       -       -  
Other long-term liabilities
    -       -       -       -       -  
Total contractual cash obligations
  $ 14,990     $ 4,078     $ 7,577     $ 3,031     $ 304  
 
While we have significant operating lease commitments for office space, except for our headquarters those commitments are generally tied to the period of performance under related portal contracts.

We have income tax uncertainties of approximately $1.8 million at December 31, 2013. These obligations are classified as non-current on our consolidated balance sheet, as resolution is expected to take more than a year. We estimate that these matters could be resolved in one to three years as reflected in the table above. However, the ultimate timing of resolution is uncertain. See Notes 2 and 9 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K for further discussion on income taxes.


INTEREST RATE RISK. Our cash is held entirely in domestic non-interest bearing transaction accounts.

Borrowings under our line of credit bear interest at a floating rate. Interest on amounts borrowed is payable at a Eurodollar rate or a base rate equal to the higher of the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5% or the bank’s prime rate. We currently have no principal amounts of indebtedness outstanding under our line of credit.

We do not use derivative financial instruments.
 
 
35

 
 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of NIC Inc.:

In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity and cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of NIC Inc. and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (1992) by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Report of Management on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Kansas City, Missouri
February 27, 2014
 
 
36

 
 
NIC INC.
 
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
 
             
   
December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
ASSETS
           
Current assets:
           
Cash
  $ 74,245,467     $ 62,358,266  
Cash restricted for payment of dividend
    22,982,447       -  
Trade accounts receivable, net (Note 2)
    52,818,352       55,261,023  
Deferred income taxes, net
    1,037,888       886,969  
Prepaid expenses & other current assets
    11,568,395       9,340,344  
Total current assets
    162,652,549       127,846,602  
Property and equipment, net
    15,167,051       16,024,724  
Intangible assets, net
    1,864,297       1,015,846  
Other assets
    289,968       252,765  
Total assets
  $ 179,973,865     $ 145,139,937  
                 
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
               
Current liabilities:
               
Accounts payable
  $ 39,111,916     $ 43,663,847  
Accrued expenses
    20,822,443       18,948,077  
Dividend payable
    22,982,447       -  
Other current liabilities
    347,743       207,577  
Total current liabilities
    83,264,549       62,819,501  
                 
Deferred income taxes, net
    2,431,568       2,050,230  
Other long-term liabilities
    2,341,461       1,345,836  
Total liabilities
    88,037,578       66,215,567  
                 
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9)
    -       -  
                 
Stockholders' equity:
               
Common stock, $0.0001 par, 200,000,000 shares authorized,
               
64,992,587 and 64,628,105 shares issued and outstanding
    6,500       6,463  
Additional paid-in capital
    88,396,700       84,308,249  
Retained earnings (accumulated deficit)
    3,533,087       (5,390,342 )
Total stockholders' equity
    91,936,287       78,924,370  
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity
  $ 179,973,865     $ 145,139,937  
                 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
 
 
 
37

 
 
NIC INC.
 
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
 
                   
   
Year Ended December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
2011
 
Revenues:
                 
Portal revenues
  $ 235,183,005     $ 198,414,662     $ 170,276,434  
Software & services revenues
    14,095,660       11,757,514       10,622,737  
Total revenues
    249,278,665       210,172,176       180,899,171  
Operating expenses:
                       
Cost of portal revenues, exclusive of depreciation &
                       
amortization (Note 2)
    143,054,274       123,568,705       104,729,936  
Cost of software & services revenues, exclusive of
                       
depreciation & amortization
    4,356,608       4,041,223       4,030,917  
Selling & administrative
    40,924,642       32,851,946       28,731,758  
Depreciation & amortization
    8,333,089       6,518,532       4,898,488  
Total operating expenses
    196,668,613       166,980,406       142,391,099  
Operating income
    52,610,052       43,191,770       38,508,072  
Other expense, net
    (51,301 )     (16,211 )     (34,820 )
Income before income taxes
    52,558,751       43,175,559       38,473,252  
Income tax provision
    20,520,660       16,836,811       15,530,770  
Net income
  $ 32,038,091     $ 26,338,748     $ 22,942,482  
                         
Basic net income per share (Note 2)
  $ 0.49     $ 0.40     $ 0.35  
Diluted net income per share (Note 2)
  $ 0.49     $ 0.40     $ 0.35  
                         
Weighted average shares outstanding:
                       
Basic
    64,888,978       64,500,244       64,017,813  
Diluted
    64,954,366       64,564,664       64,156,669  
                         
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
 
 
 
38

 
 
NIC INC.
 
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
 
                               
               
Additional
             
   
Common Stock
   
Paid-in
   
Retained Earnings
       
   
Shares
   
Amount
   
Capital
   
(Accumulated Deficit)
   
Total
 
Balance, January 1, 2011
    63,705,851     $ 6,371     $ 107,934,910     $ (54,671,572 )   $ 53,269,709  
Net income
    -       -       -       22,942,482       22,942,482  
Dividends declared
    -       -       (16,230,966 )     -       (16,230,966 )
Dividend equivalents on performance-based restricted
                                 
stock awards
    -       -       (109,610 )     -       (109,610 )
Restricted stock vestings
    532,870       53       119,904       -       119,957  
Shares surrendered and cancelled upon vesting of
                                 
restricted stock to satisfy tax withholdings
    (164,213 )     (16 )     (1,921,564 )     -       (1,921,580 )
Stock-based compensation
    -       -       4,509,727       -       4,509,727  
Tax deductions relating to stock-based compensation
    -       -       1,509,039       -       1,509,039  
Shares issuable in lieu of dividend payments on unvested
                                 
performance-based restricted stock awards
    -       -       336,404       -       336,404  
Issuance of common stock under employee stock purchase plan
    103,593       10       651,590       -       651,600  
Balance, December 31, 2011
    64,178,101       6,418       96,799,434       (31,729,090 )     65,076,762  
Net income
    -       -       -       26,338,748       26,338,748  
Dividends declared
    -       -       (16,337,681 )     -       (16,337,681 )
Dividend equivalents on performance-based restricted
                                 
stock awards
    -       -       (97,070 )     -       (97,070 )
Restricted stock vestings
    539,936       54       203,605       -       203,659  
Shares surrendered and cancelled upon vesting of
                                 
restricted stock to satisfy tax withholdings
    (167,977 )     (17 )     (2,113,139 )     -       (2,113,156 )
Stock-based compensation
    -       -       3,802,572       -       3,802,572  
Tax deductions relating to stock-based compensation
    -       -       1,351,115       -       1,351,115  
Shares issuable in lieu of dividend payments on unvested
                                 
performance-based restricted stock awards
    -       -       (106,589 )     -       (106,589 )
Issuance of common stock under employee stock purchase plan
    78,045       8       806,002       -       806,010  
Balance, December 31, 2012
    64,628,105       6,463       84,308,249       (5,390,342 )     78,924,370  
Net income
    -       -       -       32,038,091       32,038,091  
Dividends declared
    -       -       -       (22,982,447 )     (22,982,447 )
Dividend equivalents on performance-based restricted
                                 
stock awards
    -       -       -       (132,215 )     (132,215 )
Dividend equivalents cancelled upon forfeiture of
                                       
performance-based restricted stock awards
    -       -       49,909       -       49,909  
Restricted stock vestings
    401,794       40       82,580       -       82,620  
Shares surrendered and cancelled upon vesting of
                                 
restricted stock to satisfy tax withholdings
    (124,890 )     (12 )     (2,276,151 )     -       (2,276,163 )
Stock-based compensation
    -       -       4,025,960       -       4,025,960  
Tax deductions relating to stock-based compensation
    -       -       1,302,005       -       1,302,005  
Shares issuable in lieu of dividend payments on unvested
                                 
performance-based restricted stock awards
    -       -       (314 )     -       (314 )
Issuance of common stock under employee stock purchase plan
    87,578       9       904,462       -       904,471  
Balance, December 31, 2013
    64,992,587     $ 6,500     $ 88,396,700     $ 3,533,087     $ 91,936,287  
                                         
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
 
 
 
39

 
 
NIC INC.
 
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 
                   
   
Year Ended December 31,
 
   
2013