U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions are used to provide additional information and/or statutory guidance not found in State Medicaid Director Letters, State Health Official Letters, or CMCS Informational Bulletins. The different sets of FAQs as originally released can be accessed below.

Showing 1 to 10 of 30 results

Are states required to submit their Upper Payment Limit (UPL) demonstrations directly to the mailbox or should they continue to submit them to the CMS Regional Office?

States are requested to submit their UPL demonstrations to the UPL mailbox at MedicaidUPL@cms.hhs.gov, but should also send a copy of each demonstration to their CMS Regional Office, including the National Institutional Reimbursement Team (NIRT) and Non-Institutional Payment Team (NIPT) staff as appropriate, and addressed to the Associate Regional Administrator. UPL demonstrations should be submitted to meet the annual reporting requirement described in SMDL 13-003, as well as when proposing changes in payment through SPAs.

FAQ ID:92251

SHARE URL

One of the required fields in the Nursing Facility template is the Medicare Provider Number (Medicare Certification Number - Variable 112), but not all facilities are Medicare certified. How should data be entered for these facilities since it is a required field?

When a Medicare provider number is not available, such as for some nursing facilities, the state should populate variable 112 using the acronym NMC, which stands for "Not Medicare Certified". Adding this information will help to clearly identify the facility's status.

FAQ ID:92286

SHARE URL

Based on CMS guidance, states may take up to 18 months to bring an IV&V contractor on board to perform certification tasks or align current IV&V contract to comply with CMS guidance pertaining to scope of services and financial independence. What must the state do if the IV&V contractor's start up is delayed?

IV&V contractor activities must still be performed such as checklist evaluation, artifact review and preparation of IV&V Progress Reports. The state should provide a plan and timeline for how these activities will be supported and performed until the proper IV&V contract can be either procured or aligned with updated CMS guidance on IV&V.

FAQ ID:94866

SHARE URL

Is IV&V required during operations and maintenance (O&M) for MMIS?

As contained in the MECT standard RFP/contract language required by CMS, CMS does not cover activities that the state may require of the IV&V contractor during ongoing O&M. However, as Medicaid is moving away from monolithic single applications, it is expected that states will continuously update and replace modules in their enterprise. Therefore, IV&V should always have a role to ensure successful integration and testing.

FAQ ID:94881

SHARE URL

What would preclude a company from being eligible to bid on the MMIS or E&E IV&V contract(s)?

If an organization is performing another role (such as systems integrator, PMO, quality assurance, etc.) on the MMIS or E&E project, it may not perform the IV&V function on the same project. A state may contract the same vendor to perform the IV&V role for both its E&E and MMIS projects.

FAQ ID:94886

SHARE URL

Why does the IV&V contractor need to sit outside the Medicaid agency?

To reduce potential conflict of interest, CMS is ensuring that states are arranging IV&V services through contracts that should be owned outside of the agency that owns the MMIS or E&E project. The oversight organization for the IV&V contractor should not be involved in oversight of the development effort, a stakeholder in the business implementation, or the DDI contractor. The IV&V contract monitor should be aware of system development problem solving, reporting, and contractor management. This contract oversight provides true independence between the IV&V contractor and system development teams. This requirement is consistent with other HHS agencies' practices and industry best practices.

FAQ ID:94891

SHARE URL

How does section 2001(a)(5)(B) of the Affordable Care Act impact states currently covering children 6-18 up to 133 percent of the FPL under a separate CHIP?

Section 2001(a)(5)(B) of the Affordable Care Act (implemented through regulations for the Medicaid program at section 435.118) increased the minimum income limit applicable to Medicaid eligibility for the mandatory group for poverty-level related children aged 6-18 from 100 to 133 percent of the FPL under section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(VII) of the Act. Therefore, if a state is currently covering uninsured children up to 133 percent of the FPL under a separate CHIP, these children must be transitioned to the Medicaid state plan under this children's group effective January 1, 2014. CMS is available to work with states individually on their transition plans for this population.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92606

SHARE URL

Are these children who are being transferred from CHIP to the Medicaid state plan considered optional targeted low-income children under section 1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(XIV) of the Act?

No. For the purposes of eligibility, these children are considered a mandatory Medicaid group for poverty-level related children under section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(VII) of the Act. As described below, states will continue to receive the CHIP matching rate for this population.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92611

SHARE URL

Will new applicants/children ages 6-18 with incomes between 100 and 133 percent of the FPL with other health insurance qualify for coverage under the Medicaid state plan?

Yes. Under the Medicaid mandatory group for poverty-level related children under section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(VII) of the Act, insured children must be covered in addition to uninsured children (please also see applicable match rate questions below). This is different from the rules governing a separate CHIP program, which preclude coverage for insured children.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92616

SHARE URL

Does 2001(a)(5)(B) of the Affordable Care Act impact children eligible in a separate or Medicaid expansion that are currently covered at income levels above 133 percent of the FPL?

No. States continue to have the option to cover children above 133 percent of the FPL either under a Medicaid expansion or separate program. States must maintain CHIP "eligibility standards, methodologies, and procedures" for children that are no more restrictive than those in effect on March 23, 2010 as specified under the "maintenance of effort" provision at 2105(d)(3) of the Act. A parallel requirement in Medicaid can be found at sections 1902(a)(74) and 1902(gg) of the Act. These provisions are effective through September 30, 2019.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92621

SHARE URL
Results per page