Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Surveys, Audits and Governmental Investigations In the ordinary course of business, the Company may from time to time be or become subject to surveys, audits and governmental investigations under or with respect to various governmental programs and state and federal laws. Agencies associated with the programs and other third-party commercial payors periodically conduct extensive pre-payment or post-payment medical reviews or other audits of claims data to identify possible payments made or authorized other than in compliance with the requirements of Medicare or Medicaid. In order to conduct these reviews, documentation is requested from the Company and then that documentation is reviewed to determine compliance with applicable rules and regulations, including the eligibility of clients to receive benefits, the appropriateness of the care provided to those clients, and the documentation of that care. Similarly, other state and federal governmental agencies conduct reviews and investigations to confirm the Company's compliance with applicable laws where it operates, including regarding employment and wage related regulations and matters. The Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of any regulatory reviews or other governmental surveys, audits or investigations, but management does not expect any ongoing surveys, audits or investigations involving the Company to have a material adverse effect on the business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations of the Company. Regardless of the Company's expectations, however, surveys and audits are subject to inherent uncertainties and can have a material adverse impact on the Company due to, among other reasons, potential regulatory orders that inhibit its ability to operate its business, amounts paid as reimbursement or in settlement of any such matter, diversion of management resources and investigative costs. Legal Proceedings In the ordinary course of business, the Company may from time to time be or become involved in various lawsuits and claims for indemnification, some of which may seek monetary damages, including claims for punitive damages. Management does not expect any ongoing lawsuits involving the Company to have a material impact on the business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations of the Company. Legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, however, and unfavorable rulings or other events could occur. Unfavorable resolutions could involve substantial monetary damages. In addition, in matters for which conduct remedies are sought, unfavorable resolutions could include an injunction or other order precluding particular business practices or requiring other remedies. An unfavorable outcome might result in a material adverse impact on the business, liquidity, financial position, or results of operations. The Company records accruals for loss contingencies related to legal matters when it is probable that a liability will be incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. If the Company determines that a range of reasonably possible losses can be estimated, the Company records an accrual for the most probable amount in the range. Due to the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of any legal proceeding, it may not be reasonably possible to estimate a range of potential liability until the matter is closer to resolution. Legal fees related to all legal matters are expensed as incurred. The Company’s various legal proceedings have been automatically stayed as a result of the Chapter 11 Cases, with such stay to be lifted upon the effectiveness of the Plan. On January 29, 2025, a class action complaint for purported violation of federal securities laws was filed by Dinesh Kalera, individually and on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of the Company's common stock between November 3, 2022 and September 15, 2024 (the “Alleged Class Period”), in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and three of its officers who were serving as such during the Alleged Class Period. The complaint alleges claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and asserts, among other things, that the Company’s public statements concerning its NEMT segment accounts receivable collections efforts and effectiveness, cash flow results, and contractual payment and collection terms were materially false and misleading or contained material omissions. On October 27, 2025, the court appointed a lead plaintiff. The lead plaintiff will file an amended complaint on January 9, 2026. The defendants named in this action cannot reasonably estimate the potential range of loss, if any, at this stage of the proceeding. The defendants dispute the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to defend themselves vigorously in this matter. On May 12, 2025, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed by Zane Whitfield in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against several current and former members of the Company’s Board of Directors and executive officers. The Company was also named as a nominal defendant. This shareholder derivative complaint alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by issuing, causing the issuance of, and/or failing to correct the allegedly materially false and/or misleading statements and omissions of material fact that are the subject of the above-mentioned Kalera matter. The shareholder derivative complaint also alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by causing the Company to repurchase stock at inflated prices. On September 10, 2025, the plaintiff in this derivative action filed a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss the case. The court entered an order dismissing the case on September 15, 2025. Since 2017, one of the Company's PCS segment subsidiaries, All Metro Home Care Services of New York, Inc. d/b/a All Metro Health Care (“All Metro”), has been subject to a class action lawsuit in state court claiming that, among other things, All Metro failed to properly pay live-in caregivers who stay in patients’ homes for 24 hours per day (“live-ins”). The Company pays live-ins for 13 hours per day as supported through a written opinion letter from the New York State Department of Labor (“NYSDOL”). The New York Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) in a similar case involving this issue issued an order in 2019 that agreed with the NYSDOL’s interpretation to pay live-ins for 13 hours per day instead of 24 hours if certain conditions were being met. Notwithstanding the court of appeals' order in the similar case, the parties to date have been unable to settle their dispute through mediation or otherwise, and therefore discovery in the matter is continuing. If the plaintiffs prove successful in this class action lawsuit, All Metro may be liable for back wages and liquidated damages dating back to November 2011. All Metro believes that it is and has been in compliance in all material respects with the laws and regulations covering pay for live-in caregivers (including the conditions described by the New York Court of Appeals in its order), intends to continue to defend itself vigorously with respect to this matter, and the Company does not believe in any event that the ultimate outcome of this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, liquidity, financial condition or results of operations.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may from time to time be or become subject to surveys, audits and governmental investigations under or with respect to various governmental programs and state and federal laws. Agencies associated with the programs and other third-party commercial payors periodically conduct extensive pre-payment or post-payment medical reviews or other audits of claims data to identify possible payments made or authorized other than in compliance with the requirements of Medicare or Medicaid. In order to conduct these reviews, documentation is requested from the Company and then that documentation is reviewed to determine compliance with applicable rules and regulations, including the eligibility of clients to receive benefits, the appropriateness of the care provided to those clients, and the documentation of that care. Similarly, other state and federal governmental agencies conduct reviews and investigations to confirm the Company's compliance with applicable laws where it operates, including regarding employment and wage related regulations and matters. The Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of any regulatory reviews or other governmental surveys, audits or investigations, but management does not expect any ongoing surveys, audits or investigations involving the Company to have a material adverse effect on the business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations of the Company. Regardless of the Company's expectations, however, surveys and audits are subject to inherent uncertainties and can have a material adverse impact on the Company due to, among other reasons, potential regulatory orders that inhibit its ability to operate its business, amounts paid as reimbursement or in settlement of any such matter, diversion of management resources and investigative costs.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may from time to time be or become involved in various lawsuits and claims for indemnification, some of which may seek monetary damages, including claims for punitive damages. Management does not expect any ongoing lawsuits involving the Company to have a material impact on the business, liquidity, financial condition, or results of operations of the Company. Legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, however, and unfavorable rulings or other events could occur. Unfavorable resolutions could involve substantial monetary damages. In addition, in matters for which conduct remedies are sought, unfavorable resolutions could include an injunction or other order precluding particular business practices or requiring other remedies. An unfavorable outcome might result in a material adverse impact on the business, liquidity, financial position, or results of operations.

The Company records accruals for loss contingencies related to legal matters when it is probable that a liability will be incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. If the Company determines that a range of reasonably possible losses can be estimated, the Company records an accrual for the most probable amount in the range. Due to the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of any legal proceeding, it may not be reasonably possible to estimate a range of potential liability until the matter is closer to resolution. Legal fees related to all legal matters are expensed as incurred. The Company’s various legal proceedings have been automatically stayed as a result of the Chapter 11 Cases, with such stay to be lifted upon the effectiveness of the Plan.

On January 29, 2025, a class action complaint for purported violation of federal securities laws was filed by Dinesh Kalera, individually and on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of the Company's common stock between November 3, 2022 and September 15, 2024 (the “Alleged Class Period”), in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and three of its officers who were serving as such during the Alleged Class Period. The complaint alleges claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and asserts, among other things, that the Company’s public statements concerning its NEMT segment accounts receivable collections efforts and effectiveness, cash flow results, and contractual payment and collection terms were materially false and misleading or contained material omissions. On October 27, 2025, the court appointed a lead plaintiff. The lead plaintiff will file an amended complaint on January 9, 2026. The defendants named in this action cannot reasonably estimate the potential range of loss, if any, at this stage of the proceeding. The defendants dispute the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to defend themselves vigorously in this matter.

On May 12, 2025, a putative shareholder derivative complaint was filed by Zane Whitfield in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against several current and former members of the Company’s Board of Directors and executive officers. The Company was also named as a nominal defendant. This shareholder derivative complaint alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by issuing, causing the issuance of, and/or failing to correct the allegedly materially false and/or misleading statements and omissions of material fact that are the subject of the above-mentioned Kalera matter. The shareholder derivative complaint also alleged that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by causing the Company to repurchase stock at inflated prices. On September 10, 2025, the plaintiff in this derivative action filed a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss the case. The court entered an order dismissing the case on September 15, 2025.

Since 2017, one of the Company's PCS segment subsidiaries, All Metro Home Care Services of New York, Inc. d/b/a All Metro Health Care (“All Metro”), has been subject to a class action lawsuit in state court claiming that, among other things, All Metro failed to properly pay live-in caregivers who stay in patients’ homes for 24 hours per day (“live-ins”). The Company pays live-ins for 13 hours per day as supported through a written opinion letter from the New York State Department of Labor (“NYSDOL”). The New York Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) in a similar case involving this issue issued an order in 2019 that agreed with the NYSDOL’s interpretation to pay live-ins for 13 hours per day instead of 24 hours if certain conditions were being met. Notwithstanding the court of appeals' order in the similar case, the parties to date have been unable to settle their dispute through mediation or otherwise, and therefore discovery in the matter is continuing. If the plaintiffs prove successful in this class action lawsuit, All Metro may be liable for back wages and liquidated damages dating back to November 2011. All Metro believes that it is and has been in compliance in all material respects with the laws and regulations covering pay for live-in caregivers (including the conditions described by the New York Court of Appeals in its order), intends to continue to defend itself vigorously with respect to this matter, and the Company does not believe in any event that the ultimate outcome of this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, liquidity, financial condition or results of operations.