Frequently Asked Questions

Please work with your state representatives, so that they can contact CMS regional offices for quick assistance with your questions. In addition, please review other FAQs related to this topic.

FAQ ID:94431

Milestone reviews have proven to reduce risk by having earlier discussions where CMS can identify opportunities for efficiencies, facilitate collaboration with other states, and share other ideas that can save time, money, and effort. Identifying issues and opportunities earlier in the process will allow for a much greater impact than was experienced under the old process.

FAQ ID:93976

CMS encourages the use of COTS solutions where possible, and the milestone review process supports certification of COTS products. The review criteria are intended to be tailorable to support different solutions, including COTS. In this case, the technical criteria in the checklists that do not apply to COTS may be marked ""Not Applicable"" with an explanation as to why they do not apply.

FAQ ID:93986

It depends. We consider various factors. If a state is developing a complete MMIS solution with one release date, then there will be three reviews: Project Initiation Review, Operational Milestone Review, and MMIS Certification Final Review. If a state has multiple release dates with a modular or agile approach, the state would have one set of three certification reviews with CMS for each module the state would like CMS to certify. Each state will start its certification effort by having an initial consultation with CMS to determine how CMS can schedule milestone reviews that fit with the state's plan.

FAQ ID:94011

CMS has developed a milestone review process that is flexible enough to be placed over several development methodologies. CMS wants to ensure that the milestone reviews benefit and do not burden the state. CMS works with each state individually to ensure that the timing of the milestones fit within the state's internal development timeline.

FAQ ID:94001

Since 2006, State Medicaid programs have had the option to provide certain groups of Medicaid enrollees with an alternative benefit package known as "benchmark" or "benchmark-equivalent" coverage, based on one of three commercial insurance products or a fourth, "Secretary-approved" coverage option. Beginning on January 1, 2014, all Medicaid benchmark and benchmark-equivalent plans must include at least the ten statutory categories of Essential Health Benefits. Under the Affordable Care Act, the medical assistance provided to the expansion population of adults who become newly eligible for Medicaid as of January 1, 2014, must be provided consistent with section 1937 benchmark authority.

For Medicaid alternative benefit plans, three of the benchmark plans described in section 1937 (the State's largest non-Medicaid HMO, the State's employee health plan, and the FEHBP BCBS plan) may be designated by the Secretary as EHB benchmark reference plans, as described in the EHB Bulletin (link below). A State Medicaid Agency could select any of these section 1937 benchmark plans as its EHB benchmark reference plan for Medicaid. There would be no default EHB benchmark reference plan for purposes of Medicaid; each State Medicaid Agency would be required to identify an EHB benchmark reference plan for purposes of Medicaid as part of its 2014-related Medicaid State Plan changes.

If the EHB benchmark reference plan selected for Medicaid were to lack coverage within one or more of the ten statutorily-required categories of benefits, the section 1937 alternative benefit plan would need to be supplemented to ensure that it provides coverage in each of the ten statutory benefit categories. This would be in addition to any other requirements for Section 1937 plan, including Mental Health Parity and Addition Equity Act compliance.

For more information about the Essential Health Benefits, please see CCIIO's bulletin from December 2011 (available at http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/Files2/12162011/essential_health_benefits_bulletin.pdf ) and the CMCS informational bulletin from February 2012 (available at http://www.medicaid.gov/Federal-Policy-Guidance/downloads/CIB-02-17-12.pdf (PDF, 71.68 KB).

FAQ ID:93036

Yes. A State is not required to select the same EHB benchmark reference plan for Medicaid section 1937 plans that it selects for the individual and small group market, and it could have more than one EHB benchmark reference plan for Medicaid (for example, if the State were to develop more than one benefit plan under section 1937).

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 70.98 KB)

FAQ ID:93041

Yes. A State could propose its traditional Medicaid benefit package as a section 1937 alternate benefit plan under the Secretary-approved option available under section 1937 of the Social Security Act. The State would have to ensure that the ten statutory categories of EHB are covered, either through that benefit plan or as a supplement to that plan.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 70.98 KB)

FAQ ID:93046

The managed care regulations apply to all benefits delivered through a managed care delivery system, regardless of the authority under which the benefits are provided or enrollment is required. Thus, any State which uses a managed care organization to deliver benefits under the authority of section 1937 of the Act must comply with the managed care regulations at 42 CFR 438.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 70.98 KB)

FAQ ID:93051

Yes. 1915 (c) waivers are optional programs that most States currently operate and can continue to operate. States interested in making changes to their 1915(c) waivers should contact their CMS Regional Office with specific questions.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 70.98 KB)

FAQ ID:93056