Frequently Asked Questions are used to provide additional information and/or statutory guidance not found in State Medicaid Director Letters, State Health Official Letters, or CMCS Informational Bulletins. The different sets of FAQs as originally released can be accessed below.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do states need to cost allocate eligibility worker costs across programs? Will claiming the 75 percent FFP require new or increased time reporting by employees? What must a state submit in its operations APD and cost allocation plan?
In situations where eligibility workers determine eligibility for multiple programs, all costs must be distributed to the appropriate programs and governing FFP rates (90/75/50) based on approved time study methodologies and/or cost allocation plans consistent with OMB Circular A-87 cost allocation principles. These costs must also clearly differentiate between resources needed for direct data and systems-related activities and resources needed for MMIS and eligibility determination systems versus program management and oversight activities, which are only eligible for 50 percent FFP. State agencies performing eligibility determination currently develop and maintain methodologies for allocating costs among different health and human services programs. CMS does not anticipate the additional reporting required to obtain 75 percent FFP will add a significant amount of time to that process. From 45 CFR section 95.507, Plan requirements, the cost allocation support should include the following:
- A description of the procedures used to identify, measure, and allocate all costs to each of the programs
- Conform to the accounting principles and standards prescribed in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87, and other pertinent Department regulations and instructions;
- Contain sufficient information in such detail to make an informed judgment on the correctness and fairness of the state's procedures for identifying, measuring, and allocating the costs
- The cost allocation plan shall contain the following information:
- An organizational chart showing the placement of each unit whose costs are charged to the programs operated by the state agency
- A listing of all federal and all non-federal programs performed, administered, or serviced by these organizational units.
- A description of the activities performed by each organizational unit and, where not self-explanatory an explanation of the benefits provided to federal programs.
- The procedures used to identify, measure, and allocate all costs to each benefiting program and activity (including activities subject to different rates of FFP).
States should consult with their CMS cost allocation leads to determine whether any change to their approved cost allocation plan is needed and work with their counterparts at human services agencies as necessary. The methods of cost allocation should be documented in the state operations APD update submission to support the proposed budget.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)
FAQ ID:93721
SHARE URLHow will CMS monitor and oversee state implementation? Will CMS ask states to report on enhanced maintenance and operations activities separately on the CMS-64-10 and 37-10? How will CMS verify state reporting?
As noted earlier, states must submit an Operations APD to request this funding. CMS will monitor state implementation of the enhanced 75 percent FFP through ongoing review of state eligibility system implementation and operations, as well as through revised claims reporting. Specifically, CMS is revising the CMS-64-10 and 37-10 forms to separately capture eligibility determination system related maintenance and operations costs. We will separately track costs related to IT systems and eligibility determination staff as follows:
- For the IT and systems maintenance and operations, costs will be reported on the CMS-64-10 and 37-10 on line 28C - Operation of an approved Medicaid eligibility determination system/cost of in-house activities - 75 percent FFP and 28D - Operation of an approved Medicaid eligibility determination system/cost private sector contractors- 75 percent FFP.
- For the Eligibility Determination workers staffing eligible for enhanced match, costs will be reported on the CMS-64-10 and 37-10 on line 28E - Eligibility Determination staff - cost of in-house activities - 75 percent FFP and 28F- Eligibility Determination staff - cost of private sector contractors - 75 percent FFP.
- For the Eligibility Determinations workers staffing eligible for regular administrative match, costs will be reported on the CMS-64-10 and 37-10 on line 28G - Eligibility Determination staff - cost of in-hour activities - 50 percent FFP and 28 H - cost of private sector contractors - 50 percent FFP.
As this enhanced match is implemented, CMS will closely monitor implementation and reporting, and if necessary, will revise how this data is collected on the estimate and expenditure reporting forms to ensure states and CMS have the proper break out to track these activities and their related claims.
Furthermore, CMS will continue to work with states over time to ensure that their systems continue to remain compliant with the Seven Conditions and Standards. For example, under the Reporting Condition, state systems should be able to produce accurate data that are necessary for oversight, administration, evaluation, integrity and transparency. CMS has recently provided technical specifications for the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (TMSIS) data file to states following more than a year of collaboration with states participating in the T-MSIS pilot. CMS envisions that the T-MSIS data file will be submitted on a monthly basis. We anticipate releasing additional guidance on this subject in the coming weeks.
As with all expenditures, federal match must be properly claimed and is subject to review and approval. Again, CMS will work closely with the each state to review and approve costs covered and will use the APD process to confirm with states specific implementation details, before states start to submit claims.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)
FAQ ID:93726
SHARE URLCan a state review providers whose claims meet the 60 percent threshold and assume that those providers would be automatically eligible?
Each physician must self-attest to being a qualified provider. It is not appropriate for a state to rely on a modifier to a claim for the initial self-attestation. Under the final rule, states are not required to independently verify the eligibility of each and every physician who might qualify for higher payment. Therefore, it is important that documentation exist that the physicians themselves supplied a proper attestation. That attestation has two parts. Physicians must attest to an appropriate specialty designation and also must further attest to whether that status is based on either being Board certified or to having the proper claims history. Once the signed self-attestation is in the hands of the Medicaid agency, claims may be identified for higher payment through the use of a modifier.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:94276
SHARE URLCMS clarified in the final rule for CMS 2370-F that, for out of state providers, the beneficiary's home state (e.g., state A) may defer to the determination of the physician's home state (e.g., state B) with respect to eligibility for higher payment. However, if states A and B receive different Medicare locality adjustments, which locality rate must be paid?
As with all Medicaid services, the state in which the beneficiary is determined eligible (state A) sets the payment rate for services. Therefore, state A would be responsible for paying using the methodology it had chosen with respect to determining the appropriate Medicare rate and would not be required to pay the rate the physician would receive from state B.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:94361
SHARE URLWhen does the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) plan to issue a correction to the mistake they noted during the call with Medicaid agencies regarding payment under CMS 2370-F at the lesser of a provider's billed charge or the Medicare rate?
The correction was published in the Federal Register on December 14, 2012. In it CMS clarified that states must reimburse providers the lower or the provider’s charge or the applicable Medicare rate.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:94376
SHARE URLIf a physician presents a certificate for CMS 2370-F eligibility from one of the defined boards, can the certificate be used as the legal document verifying the physician's certification or does the State have to verify with the board that the physician is certified and that the presented certificate is still active and valid?
States may accept the certificate and need not verify. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expects states to make physicians aware that they are responsible for providing accurate information.
FAQ ID:92686
SHARE URLThe final rule for CMS 2370-F indicated that 100 percent Federal Financial Participation (FFP) is not available for stand-alone Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) plans. What criteria should be used to determine if a plan is a stand-alone CHIP plan? What agency will determine if a plan is a stand-alone CHIP plan?
The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) approves CHIP programs as stand-alone or Medicaid expansions. Information on whether or not a particular state operates a stand-alone or expansion program is available at http://medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-Program-Information/By-Topics/Childrens-Health-Insurance-Program-CHIP/Downloads/Map-CHIP-Program-Designs-by-State-.pdf (PDF, 120.65 KB).
FAQ ID:92696
SHARE URLFederally qualified health centers (FQHCs)/ rural health clinics (RHCs) which receive an encounter rate are excluded under the rule for CMS-2370 F. Are FQHCs/RHCs who are paid provider fee-for-service included in the increase?
FQHCs and RHCs are required by law to be paid at least prospective payment system (PPS) for core primary care services. Physician services are core FQHC and RHC services and, therefore, should not be reimbursed on a fee-for-service basis.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:92701
SHARE URLIn our state, advanced practice nurses must have a collaborative practice agreement with a physician within 50 miles of their office. Under the collaborative practice agreement, a physician must review a certain percentage of the nurse's patient charts every 2 weeks. Such nurses bill independently using their own Medicaid number. Is the collaborative practice agreement enough documentation for an advance practice nurse, with at least 60 percent of services billed by the nurse for calendar year (CY) 2012 for
Increased payment is available for services provided by eligible physicians or for services provided under their personal supervision. This means that the physician accepts professional responsibility (and legal liability) for the services provided. It does not appear that the collaborative arrangement requires that the physician accept professional responsibility for each of the services provided by the nurses. Therefore, increased payment would not be available.
However, if the physician is required to accept professional responsibility for the services provided by the advanced practice nurses and the physician is eligible based on self-attestation to a specified primary care specialty designation supported by either appropriate Board certification or a 60 percent claims history, then increased payment would be available.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:92706
SHARE URLIf the supervising physician does not self-attest to the physician specialty or subspecialty qualification under CMS 2370-F, can the physician supervise a mid-level provider? If the supervising physician self-attests to the 60 percent threshold, but not one of the defined specialty or subspecialty qualifications, can the physician supervise a mid-level?
The eligibility of services provided by mid-level/non-physician practitioners is dependent on 1) the eligibility of the physician and 2) whether or not the physician accepts professional responsibility for the services provided by the mid-level. As previously noted, physicians are eligible only if they first self-attest to a specified specialty designation and also to either being appropriately Board certified or having a 60 percent claims history.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:92711
SHARE URL
Results per page