Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. However, the benefit package and cost-sharing structure must be in compliance with separate CHIP rules.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93801

Yes, states will need to submit a CHIP SPA for approval to provide coverage to children under this group in accordance with section 457.60. CMS will make available a simplified SPA template on which the state may report how these protected children will be identified and enrolled and information on benefits and cost-sharing.

Because of the flexibility provided states in establishing eligibility for separate CHIP programs, states could establish a group within an existing separate CHIP or as a standalone separate CHIP with eligibility criteria specific to the chosen option. For example, a state could establish a CHIP group with eligibility limited to children losing Medicaid at their 2014 redetermination using MAGI methodology. Coverage provided under this group would sunset when the last child eligible for 2101(f) protection came up for their first annual renewal in CHIP.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93806

Yes. States will need to conduct a renewal at the end of the 12-month separate CHIP coverage period in accordance with section 457.343 to determine if the child remains eligible for CHIP and, if not, to determine potential eligibility for other insurance affordability programs and transfer the child's account, as appropriate, to the Medicaid agency or the Exchange.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93811

As noted above, the protection afforded under section 2101(f) extends until the child comes up for his or her first regular renewal for coverage under the separate CHIP program, which would be 12 months from the child's transfer from Medicaid to the separate CHIP. When the last child eligible for protection under section 2101(f) comes up for renewal in the separate CHIP, the state may discontinue this part of its program.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93816

No. Systems programmed to determine eligibility based on 2013 rules would not properly determine eligibility based on MAGI methodologies and therefore could not be used to identify these children. Children protected by section 2101(f) are children who lose Medicaid eligibility after MAGI rules (including household composition and family income) are applied but would have remained eligible if the former disregards had also been applied.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93821

No. Section 2101(f) does not apply to children made ineligible for a separate CHIP as a result of the elimination of income disregards. Children losing coverage under a separate CHIP must be screened for eligibility for other insurance affordability programs and their cases electronically transferred per section 457.348.

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93826

Yes. States may claim the enhanced match available under title XXI for children enrolled in a separate CHIP in accordance with section 2101(f).

Supplemental Links:

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

FAQ ID:93831

Beginning in 2014, the Affordable Care Act authorizes two types of increased federal medical assistance percentages (FMAPs) for state expenditures for low-income individuals in the new adult group (that is, the group described in section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(VIII) of the Social Security Act (the Act)) - the newly eligible FMAP and the expansion state FMAP. Under the statute, these two increased federal matching rates are only available to states that adopt the new adult group.

The newly eligible FMAP is available for medical assistance expenditures on behalf of "newly eligible" individuals, who are defined (in section 1905(y)(2) of the Act) as individuals between the ages of 19 and 64 who are enrolled in the new adult group and who would not have been eligible for full benefits, benchmark coverage (described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of section 1937(b)(1) of the Act), or benchmark-equivalent coverage (described in section 1937(b)(2) of the Act) as of December 1, 2009. An individual may also be "newly eligible" if he or she would have been eligible but could not have been enrolled for such benefits or coverage because the applicable Medicaid waiver or demonstration had limited or capped enrollment as of December 1, 2009.

The newly eligible FMAP (described in section 1905(y)(1) of the Act) is 100 percent in calendar years 2014-2016, 95 percent in calendar year 2017, 94 percent in calendar year 2018, 93 percent in calendar year 2019, and 90 percent in calendar years 2020 and beyond. The expansion state FMAP (described in section 1905(z)(2) of the Act) is an alternate increased FMAP available to match the expenditures for certain adults in states that previously expanded Medicaid and, as a result, may not qualify for the newly eligible FMAP. More details about the expansion state FMAP are included in Question 5. In our August 17, 2011 eligibility NPRM, we proposed that methods for assigning the appropriate FMAP would not require that states undertake the process of using their old eligibility rules to determine if someone would have been eligible under December 2009 rules. We have been consulting with states to test different methodologies for accuracy and simplicity.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 52.92 KB)

FAQ ID:94071

As described above, the newly eligible FMAP applies to adults in the new low-income adult eligibility group who would not have been eligible for full benefits, benchmark benefits, or benchmark-equivalent benefits under the state's rules as of December 1, 2009. At the time of approval of the section 1115 demonstrations in effect as of that date, neither CMS nor states explicitly designated the coverage offered under demonstrations as "benchmark" or "benchmark-equivalent" coverage, even though the coverage offered to demonstration beneficiaries may have met such standards. Therefore, CMS is requesting that states that used section 1115 demonstrations to expand coverage to low-income adults as of December 1, 2009 provide CMS with an analysis of the benefit package that was offered so that CMS can determine whether the benefits provided could have met a benchmark or benchmark equivalent standard, as in effect in December 2009. A separate analysis should be undertaken for each demonstration benefit package, if different demonstration populations received different benefits under the demonstration.

In conducting the benefit analysis, it will be important for states to utilize a consistent methodology and provide CMS with sufficient data to substantiate their analyses. States' benchmark-equivalence analyses must be certified by a qualified actuary and must include information on the data, assumptions, and methodology used to calculate actuarial values, in accordance with regulations implementing section 1937 of the Act, which are already in effect at 42 C.F.R. 440.330-340. CMS is working with all affected states (that is, states with demonstrations covering adults in effect on December 1, 2009) and will provide them with guidance about the form and manner in which to provide information about eligibility and benefits in effect as of December 1, 2009. CMS will use the benefit analysis that states provide to determine the appropriate FMAP. If any state has questions about this process, they should contact their State Operations and Technical Assistance (SOTA) team representative.

It is also important to note that if the benefit analysis described above indicates that the newly eligible FMAP is not available for a particular population, states may nevertheless be able to claim the expansion state FMAP for certain non-pregnant adults enrolled in the new adult group (as described in Question 5). CMS will work with each state that expanded coverage to adults prior to the enactment of the Affordable Care Act to address questions and to ensure that the correct FMAP is applied to expenditures for each population.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 52.92 KB)

FAQ ID:94076

When Congress enacted the Affordable Care Act, some states had already expanded coverage to adults at higher incomes. The expansion state designation under the statute provides an alternate increased FMAP to states that adopt the new adult group but where some individuals in the new group do not qualify for the newly eligible FMAP because they would have qualified for full benefits, benchmark benefits, or benchmark-equivalent benefits under the state's rules as of December 1, 2009. The expansion state FMAP may be available to qualifying states for expenditures for certain non-pregnant childless adults (those who are enrolled in the new adult group and who the state may require to enroll in benchmark coverage), to the extent that such individuals do not qualify for the newly eligible FMAP.

A qualifying expansion state (described in section 1905(z)(3) of the Act) is a state that, as of March 23, 2010 (the date of enactment of the Affordable Care Act), provided "health benefits coverage" either through Medicaid or a fully state-funded program to parents and nonpregnant childless adults up to at least 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). For purposes of this statutory definition, such health benefits coverage as of March 23, 2010 must have:

• Included inpatient hospital services.
• Not been dependent on access to employer coverage, employer contribution, or employment.
• Not been limited to premium assistance, hospital-only benefits, a high deductible health plan, or a health opportunity account

States seeking to confirm their status as expansion states should provide CMS with an analysis of the scope of coverage provided as of March 23, 2010, citing applicable demonstration special terms and conditions or state-based policies to establish eligibility levels and the coverage provided. As we have explained in a previously released FAQ, if a population covered by a state that qualifies as an expansion state meets the criteria for the newly eligible matching rate, the state will receive the newly eligible matching rate for that population. A state will always receive the more favorable FMAP if two FMAPs might be applicable for a particular population. For example, states that qualify as expansion states may be eligible for the newly eligible FMAP if the expansion offered less than full benefits, benchmark benefits, or benchmark-equivalent benefits, or if the expansion started after December 1, 2009. In such an instance, expenditures for adults in the new adult coverage group will be subject to the newly eligible FMAP. The expansion state FMAP (described in section 1905(z)(2) of the Act) is the regular FMAP rate increased by the number of percentage points equal to a "transition percentage" (which ranges from 50-100 percent) of the gap between the regular Medicaid FMAP and the increased "newly eligible" FMAP. In 2019 and beyond, the expansion state FMAP will be equal to the newly eligible FMAP, which means it will be 93 percent in 2019 and 90 percent in 2020 and thereafter.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 52.92 KB)

FAQ ID:94081