Frequently Asked Questions

State Medicaid Director Letter #17-004 addressed this area by stating: “Reductions necessary to implement CMS federal Medicaid payment requirements (e.g., federal upper payment limits and financial participation limits), but only in circumstances under which the state is not exercising discretion as to how the requirement is implemented in rates. For example, if the federal statute or regulation imposes an aggregate upper payment limit that requires the state to reduce provider payments, the state should consider the impact of the payment reduction on access.” In addition, the long-standing policy of the Medicaid program has been that Medicare rates are sufficient to ensure access.

FAQ ID:93521

We acknowledge that there are differences between the Medicare and Medicaid populations, but nothing in the policy guidance or statute compels states to reduce the items that states provide to people with disabilities under the state plan. As noted above, the statute does not expressly compel states to reduce the payment rates for DME. The statute limits the amount of money that the federal government will pay (i.e., FFP) for the relevant DME in the aggregate as compared with the relevant DME provided in the Medicare program. States retain the flexibility to make payments at rates that best serve the needs of their Medicaid beneficiaries.

FAQ ID:93526

No, an upper payment limit demonstration considers all Medicaid payments (base and supplemental). States must conduct UPL demonstrations for the applicable services described in State Medicaid Director Letter (SMDL) 13-003 regardless of whether a state makes supplemental payments under the Medicaid state plan for the services.

FAQ ID:92191

Yes, the templates allow the use of multiple cost centers. For example, if the state uses a cost methodology for ancillary services and a per-diem methodology for routine services, the state will complete one cost template and one per-diem template in order to account for these two cost centers. Every hospital would be featured in each of the two templates; however, to differentiate their provider information, the state would append the Medicare Certification Number (Medicare ID) (variable 112) with a letter, such as an -A or a -B. For example, if the Medicare ID was 123456, it would be depicted in the cost template as 123456-A and in the per diem template as 123456-B. If a Medicare Certification Number is not available then the state should append the Medicaid Provider Number. If there are multiple cost centers under either the cost or per-diem methodology, the state would separate out the cost centers within their respective templates. Each cost center should be associated with only one appended letter and these should be described in the notes tab. When using multiple cost centers, the state should insert a new tab in the templates that summarizes the UPL gap calculations for each of the ownership categories (state government owned, non-state government owned, and private), unless a summary worksheet is already included in the workbook.

FAQ ID:92261

Yes, the template allows the use of multiple cost centers with multiple cost-to-charge ratios. The state would separately report the costs and payments associated with each of the cost centers in the cost template. To differentiate the cost centers, the state would append the Medicare Certification Number (Medicare ID) (variable 112) with a letter, for example an -A, -B, or -C, that would be used as a unique identifier for each cost center.

FAQ ID:92266

Yes, the templates allow the use of multiple methodologies. The state would complete the templates associated with the UPL methodologies used. For example, if the state uses a cost-based methodology for state owned hospitals and a payment-based methodology for private hospitals, then the state would complete the cost template for the state owned hospitals and the payment template for the private hospitals. When using multiple methodologies, the state should insert a new tab in the templates that summarizes the UPL gap calculations for each of the ownership categories (state government owned, non-state government owned, and private), unless a summary worksheet is already included in the workbook.

FAQ ID:92271

The cost of the tax should be reported in Variable 401 - MCD Provider Tax Cost. A state may separately report the Medicaid portion of the cost of a provider assessment/tax only when it is using a cost based methodology to calculate the UPL. A state may not include this cost when calculating a DRG or Payment based UPL demonstration.

FAQ ID:92366

The ASD-related services should be provided through the Medicaid state plan for the EPSDT-eligible individuals, rather than the 1915(c) waiver. CMS will work with states to ensure that such services are able to be made available under the state plan. Accordingly, CMS with also work with states to remove the service from the 1915(c) home and community-based services waiver at the next amendment or renewal, whichever comes first.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 252.32 KB)

FAQ ID:93206

No. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is one treatment modality for ASD. CMS is not endorsing or requiring any particular treatment modality for ASD. State Medicaid agencies are responsible for determining what services are medically necessary for eligible individuals. States are expected to adhere to long-standing EPSDT obligations for individuals from birth to age 21, including providing medically necessary services available for the treatment of ASD.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 252.32 KB)

FAQ ID:93211

There is no specific time frame for CMS review of state practices in this area. The CMCS Informational Bulletin released July 7, 2014 (see http://www.medicaid.gov/Federal-PolicyGuidance/Downloads/CIB-07-07-14.pdf (PDF, 143.2 KB)), related to Autism Spectrum Disorder discusses the obligations under the Medicaid statute and regulations that are already in effect. However, CMS recognizes that states may not have focused on the application of these requirements in this area. As a result, a state may need time to review its current program policies to determine if changes are needed to existing state regulations and/or policy to ensure compliance. States may also want to confer with the stakeholder community for public input on the benefit design of autism services for children. CMS believes states should complete this work expeditiously and should not delay or deny provision of medically necessary services. CMS is available to provide technical assistance to states to ensure the availability of services that children may need.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 252.32 KB)

FAQ ID:93221