Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. Certain types of personnel costs are eligible for the 75 percent matching rate, subject to current MMIS maintenance and operations claiming rules. The State Medicaid Manual delineates which types of personnel costs can be claimed at enhanced match, including staff direct labor and fringe benefit costs. Only direct costs allocable to the development or operation of an MMIS (including Medicaid eligibility determination system) are eligible for reimbursement at enhanced FFP rates. Such costs include: utilities, rent, telephone service, etc., necessitated by either the development or operation of an MMIS or eligibility determination system. Costs which cannot be specifically identified with the development or operation of an MMIS (including Medicaid eligibility determination system) are matched at 50 percent FFP.

Such costs are usually indirect costs including the staff costs associated with agency-wide functions such as accounting, budgeting, and general administration.

The state must submit an Operations APD which includes an allocation or distribution plan showing the breakout of direct and indirect costs for equipment, supplies, and non-personnel resources it intends to claim, and justification for those.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93711

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

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

In an assessment model, the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace will not make a final Medicaid determination. Instead, the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace will transmit the account to the Medicaid or CHIP agency when they have evaluated the individual and identified him or her as Medicaid or CHIP eligible, and the Medicaid or CHIP agency will make the formal determination. In a determination model, the Medicaid or CHIP agency delegate the authority to make determinations to the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace. In both an assessment and determination model, as described in more detail in 42 CFR section 435.1200, the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace will utilize the same set of eligibility criteria, including selected state-specific options and standard verification procedures. If the state agency chooses the determination model, it must accept the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace determination as final. If the state chooses the assessment model, it must accept findings made by the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace relating to a criterion of eligibility, as long as the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace applies the same policies and verification procedures as those the state agency employs. In a state with a separate CHIP agency, the state Medicaid and CHIP agencies can make different choices allowing the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace to make an assessment or determination. States must choose either the assessment or determination model for all applications; they may not choose between models on a case-by-case basis. States will need to indicate their assessment or determination decision to CMS in a State Plan Amendment, as well as in the Memorandum of Agreement it signs with the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93731

Yes. In an assessment model, where an applicant is assessed eligible by the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace and later found to be ineligible by the state Medicaid agency, the state must transfer the account to the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace. Once received, the state Medicaid determination will be accepted and the account will be assessed by the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace for enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP) and eligibility for Advanced Premium Tax Credits/Cost Sharing Reductions.

For the determination model, as discussed in section 435.1200(c), as governed by the agreement signed between the Medicaid agency and the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace, the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace determines eligibility for individuals applying to the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace for Medicaid/CHIP based on MAGI, and the state Medicaid or CHIP agency agrees to accept eligibility findings made by the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93736

For individuals assessed eligible for Medicaid/CHIP by the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace, their account will be transferred to the state Medicaid/CHIP agency for a final determination. Once enrolled in Medicaid/CHIP, regardless of where the initial application was submitted, all updates, redeterminations and renewals are handled by the enrolling entity (e.g., the state Medicaid/CHIP agency). No further coordination would be needed with the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace except when an individual is found ineligible for Medicaid or CHIP during the redetermination process. In this case, the state agency would transfer the individual's account to the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace to be assessed for enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP) and eligibility for Advanced Premium Tax Credits /Cost Sharing Reductions. The Federally-Facilitated Marketplace will not handle redeterminations or renewals for Medicaid/CHIP and will refer individuals to the appropriate site in the state as appropriate.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93741

No. There will not be integration of the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace and states' client registries. Instead, the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace will both verify current Medicaid/CHIP enrollment as part of the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace "applicant" application, and will also conduct quarterly checks of the Medicaid/CHIP enrollment files to determine any overlap with Federally-Facilitated Marketplace enrollment logs.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93746

The Affordable Care Act provides significant federal support to ensure the availability of coverage to low-income adults. Enrollment caps limit enrollment in coverage on a first come, first serve basis. Periods of ineligibility delay or deny coverage for otherwise eligible individuals. These policies do not further the objectives of the Medicaid program, which is the statutory requirement for allowing section 1115 demonstrations. As such, we do not anticipate that we would authorize enrollment caps or similar policies through section 1115 demonstrations for the new adult group or similar populations.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93751

Demonstrations focused on changes to how health care services are delivered, such as the use of managed care, will not generally affect the state's matching rate. Please refer to our February 2013 FAQs (PDF, 135.35 KB), which provide further clarification on the two increased federal match rates: the newly eligible rate and the expansion state rate as well as the final FMAP rule published on April 2, 2013. Additionally, CMS issued two State Medicaid Director letters, on July 10, 2012, that provide guidance on how states can adopt integrated care models without the need for a section 1115 demonstration.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93756

Section 2101(f) of the Affordable Care Act (implemented through regulations for the CHIP program at 42 CFR section 457.310) provides that states maintain coverage under a separate CHIP for children who lose Medicaid eligibility (including eligibility under a Medicaid expansion or M-CHIP program) due to the elimination of disregards under the new "modified adjusted gross income" (MAGI) based methodologies, which will be effective on January 1, 2014. This provision was intended to create a mechanism to ensure a smooth transition and continuity of coverage for children as the new income counting rules take effect.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 105.59 KB)

FAQ ID:93761