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 40 results

Should the rate of required exclusions be reported with the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure's Part 1 performance rate?

The measure excludes plan members who are not ambulatory from the measure rate, but it is not necessary to report the number of members excluded with the measure’s performance rate.

FAQ ID:89006

SHARE URL

Is a specific screening tool required for the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure?

No, a specific screening tool is not required for this measure. However, potential screening tools may include the Morse Fall Scale and timed Get-Up-And-Go test.

FAQ ID:89011

SHARE URL

What is the difference between a screening (Part 1) and a risk assessment (Part 2) for the purposes of calculating the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure?

A falls screening is an evaluation of whether a Managed Long Term Services and Supports plan member has experienced a history of falls and/or problems with balance or gait. A falls risk assessment includes a balance/gait assessment and one other assessment component and should only be performed for members with a documented history of falls (at least two falls or one fall with injury in the past year).

FAQ ID:89016

SHARE URL

What if I encounter an account that does not appear to fit into any of a state's eligibility coverage groups?

Applicants that indicate they have a disability, need long-term care or are over age 65 are always referred to the Medicaid agency for a determination on a non-MAGI basis, regardless of income and household composition, since the FFM is evaluating eligibility for MAGI-based eligibility groups only. Additionally, applicants may always request a full Medicaid determination at the end of the application process. In assessment states, the Medicaid agency will do a final determination of eligibility for these applicants, whereas in determination states, the Medicaid agency just needs to follow up for a non-MAGI determination. The expanded flat file will contain a specific indicator showing if the applicant requested a full determination.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92136

SHARE URL

If a state's inpatient hospital, outpatient hospital, or nursing facility Upper Payment Limit (UPL) demonstration has been approved by CMS for demonstration year 2018, does the UPL template still need to be populated and submitted for 2018?

No, states that already have submitted their 2018 (07/01/2017 - 06/30/2018) inpatient hospital, outpatient hospital, or nursing facility services UPL demonstrations will not have to resubmit using the templates. In that instance, CMS will populate the templates using data already submitted by the state.

FAQ ID:92211

SHARE URL

Our Inpatient Hospital Upper Payment Limit (UPL) demonstration is too large to send in one workbook, can we submit our demonstration to CMS in multiple workbooks? Alternatively, may states submit separate workbooks for each ownership category?

Yes, a state should submit multiple workbooks to CMS to provide a complete UPL demonstration for each service category subject to the UPL (Inpatient Hospital services (IPH), Outpatient Hospital services (OPH), Nursing Facility services (NF), Clinic, Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD), Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities (ICF/IID), Psychiatric Residential Treatment Facility (PRTF), and Qualified Practitioner supplemental payments). When submitting UPL demonstrations, the state should use the following naming convention: UPL_<UPL Demo Date Range>_<Service Type Abbreviation>_R<Region Number>_<State Abbreviation>_<Workbook Number>.xls. Here is an example of the naming convention: UPL_20170701-20180630_IP_R01_CT_01.xls.As well, states may submit one separate workbook for each ownership category (state government owned, non-state government owned, and private).

FAQ ID:92241

SHARE URL

Can states rely on the information contained in the enhanced flat files?

We believe these files have information that states can rely on. As with any transmission of data or logic process, discrepancies may arise. However, we have done quality reviews and continue to act on reports of issues as quickly as possible by investigating them and introducing systems fixes as needed. We are continuing our testing and quality assurance efforts as well. We expect that states will be doing the same on accounts transferred from states to the FFM. We will continue to rely on our daily desk officer calls and our SOTA process to follow up with states on any questions that may arise.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91906

SHARE URL

What action may the state take if the state believes there is another basis for excluding an individual from flat file-based enrollment based on state analysis or external information?

If the state would like to exclude individuals from enrollment based on the flat file, please reach out to CMCS to discuss the state's options. Our goal in offering this flat file option is to provide an additional avenue for enrollment and we will work with states on how they might best maximize the use of these files.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91921

SHARE URL

What if a state later determines that a person enrolled based on information in the flat file is not eligible for Medicaid or CHIP?

In a letter dated November 29, 2013, (see http://www.medicaid.gov/Federal-PolicyGuidance/downloads/SHO-13-008.pdf (PDF, 117.76 KB)) CMS offered states the opportunity to apply for a waiver under section 1902(e)(14)(A) of the Social Security Act to allow them to make temporary enrollment decisions based on the information included in the flat file. So, as long as states follow the procedures outlined in the guidance and other applicable rules with respect to eligibility and claiming, federal funding is available for this temporary enrollment. Individual's circumstances might change and other factors might arise that could change the outcome of the eligibility determination once the state evaluates eligibility based on the full account transfer. Federal funding is not at risk for states that follow appropriate procedures to enroll beneficiaries based on the FFM's determination or assessment of eligibility.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91926

SHARE URL

We understand that if we use the expanded flat file for enrollment, applicants are eligible to receive Medicaid for 90 days for assessment states and that we will run them through a MAGI-based determination in the future. If we enroll someone based on the flat file, and then become aware of additional information regarding the individual's eligibility before we receive the full account transfer, do we need to act on that information?

Since the waiver is a temporary grant of authority, if changes in circumstance are reported then states have the flexibility to choose to act on reported changes immediately or wait until the full determination occurs. If a state has the capability to review and process the changes reported they can do so, and if a state does not wish to act upon reported changes during this temporary waiver period that is also permissible. States should discuss with CMS how to document the state's policy regarding changes in circumstance in the waiver request.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91931

SHARE URL
Results per page