Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. As with children who move from a separate CHIP to Medicaid because of the change in Medicaid eligibility to 133 percent FPL, children moving from CHIP to Medicaid because of the application of the 5 percent disregard may also be funded through title XXI.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:91881

Yes. As stated in the Frequently Asked Questions pertaining to this provision posted on April 25, 2013, states may claim the enhanced match available under title XXI for children who lose Medicaid eligibility due to the elimination of income disregards as a result of the conversion to MAGI. These children now meet the definition of a targeted low-income child and will be enrolled in a separate CHIP in accordance with section 2101(f) of the ACA. If states choose the option to maintain Medicaid eligibility for such children title XIX funds and regular FMAP must be used to provide coverage.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:91886

Generally, no. Section 2105(c) (8) of the Social Security Act limits enhanced FMAP to the expenditures associated with children whose effective family income is at or below 300 percent FPL. Expenditures for children whose effective family income exceeds 300 percent of the FPL are matched at the regular Medicaid FMAP rate rather than the enhanced FMAP. However, the enhanced matching rate continues to be available for expenditures on populations whose income exceeds 300% FPL in states in which the income standard exceeds 300 percent as a result of MAGI conversion, as well as for states with approved income limits for CHIP above 300% of the FPL prior to the passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA).

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:91891

States are no longer allowed to cover parents in CHIP after Sept. 30, 2013 and therefore, are no longer eligible to receive the enhanced CHIP FMAP for expenditures for parents.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:91896

The UPL demonstration year is defined according to the last year encompassed by the demonstration. For example, a UPL covering the period 07/01/2016 to 06/30/2017 is defined as the 2017 UPL.

FAQ ID:92231

Applicants that indicate they have a disability, need long-term care or are over age 65 are always referred to the Medicaid agency for a determination on a non-MAGI basis, regardless of income and household composition, since the FFM is evaluating eligibility for MAGI-based eligibility groups only. Additionally, applicants may always request a full Medicaid determination at the end of the application process. In assessment states, the Medicaid agency will do a final determination of eligibility for these applicants, whereas in determination states, the Medicaid agency just needs to follow up for a non-MAGI determination. The expanded flat file will contain a specific indicator showing if the applicant requested a full determination.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 198.3 KB)

FAQ ID:92136

The statute and regulations require that states provide individuals several channels through which they can apply for Medicaid and CHIP coverage - by mail, in person, on line and over the telephone. Following are some guiding principles for administering telephonic applications based on successful strategies many states have in place today.

1. Accepting a Telephonic Application - States may develop their own processes for accepting and adjudicating telephonic applications. The process for accepting applications by phone must be designed to gather data into a sufficient format that will be accessible for account transfer to the appropriate insurance affordability program. For example, a customer service representative could verbally communicate application questions to the applicant, while electronically filling out the online version of the single streamlined application.
2. Voice Signatures - All applications must be signed (under penalty of perjury) in order to complete an eligibility determination. In the case of telephonic applications, states must have a process in place to assist individuals in applying by phone and be able to accept telephonically recorded signatures at the time of application submission. If applicable, states can maintain their current practices of audio recording and accepting voice signatures as required for identity proofing.
3. Records and Storage - Upon request, states must be able to provide individuals with a record of their completed application, including all information used to make the eligibility determination. As such, CMS recommends that states record all telephonic applications. This may be accomplished by taping the complete application transaction as an audio file, or by producing a written transcript of the application transaction, among other options. The length of storage of these records should comply with current regulations on application storage.
4. Confirmations and Receipts - States should provide a confirmation receipt documenting the telephonic application to the applicant. Such confirmation should be provided upon submission of the application or at any time the applicant wishes to end the customer representative interaction. Confirmation receipts can be delivered via electronic or paper mail (based on the applicant's preference). Confirmation receipts must include key information for applicants, including but not limited to the application summary, the eligibility determination summary page, a copy of the attestations/rights and responsibilities and the submission date of the signed application.

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 295.71 KB)

FAQ ID:92156

We do not believe the statue requires states to cover, under this group, individuals who were in foster care and enrolled in Medicaid when they turned age 18 or aged out of foster care in a different state. However, we believe the statute provides states the option to do so. As noted above, pending publication of a final regulation at section 435.150, states may exercise the option proposed when they complete SPA page S33 for this group.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:92166

Yes. Section 115 of CHIPRA gives states the option to claim expenditures for Medicaid expansion program populations under section 1905(u)(2)(B) of the Act, either at the enhanced FMAP rate using title XXI funds or at the regular FMAP rate using title XIX funds. States that elect to claim expenditures under title XXI will receive the enhanced FMAP rate. However, states that elect to claim expenditures under title XIX will receive the regular Medicaid FMAP rate. Claims submitted at the enhanced FMAP rate will be paid from the state's CHIP allotment.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:92171