Daily News

View All News

Competitive Pressure, Benefits Hit DLH Gross Margin

December 14 2012

Competitive pressure and additional health and welfare benefits negatively impacted gross profit at DLH Holdings Corp. (NASD: DLHC), a provider of healthcare and logistics staffing to the federal government. Gross margin fell to 9.2 percent in the company’s fiscal fourth quarter ended Sept. 30 from 15.1 percent in the same period in the previous year.

CFO Kathryn JohnBull reported gross margins are expected to be more consistent with historical levels in fiscal 2013.

Fourth-quarter revenue at the Atlanta-based firm rose 20.7 percent to $12.5 million.

DLH also reduced its net loss in its fourth quarter to $354,000 from a loss of $3.7 million in the same period last year. The fourth quarter of 2011 included an intangible asset impairment charge of almost $2.6 million.

Full-year revenue rose 17.3 percent to $49.2 million. And DLH’s gross margin fell to 11.4 percent from 14.1 percent in the previous year.

DLH posted a net loss of $2.0 million in fiscal 2012 compared to a net loss of $4.3 million in the previous year.

“During FY12, DLK completed several key milestones which required an initial expenditure of capital but will provide benefit in the coming fiscal year,” said President and CEO Zachary Parker. “These included the recruitment of our new chief financial officer, Kathryn JohnBull, as well as severance paid to the exiting CFO; program management training provided to leadership across the organization; and the final phase of an implementation of an enterprise resource planning system that was recently approved by the [Defense Contract Audit Agency] for award of cost reimbursable contracts.”

DLH Holdings Corp. (NASD: DLHC)
For the fourth quarter ended Sept. 30, 2012, as compared with the year-ago period.
Revenue: $12.5 million, +20.7 percent
Net loss: $354,000 vs. net loss of $3.7 million

For the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2012, compared with the previous year.
Revenue: $49.2 million, +17.3 percent
Net loss: $2.0 million vs. net loss of $4.3 million

Comments

Add New Comment

Post comment

NOTE: Links will not be clickable.
Security text:*