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.
Frequently Asked Questions
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 URLWe 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 URLIf an application contains a household which is a mixed case with MAGI and non-MAGI individuals, how should the state process enrollment in this situation?
Because the Federally Facilitated Marketplace (FFM) is providing eligibility determinations/assessments for Medicaid under the MAGI standard, the state can process enrollment for MAGI individuals under the waiver authority. Since the FFM is providing non-MAGI applicant referrals on the expanded flat file, the state would act upon the non-MAGI referrals in the same manner as it would through the account transfer service.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:91936
SHARE URLWhat are the security requirements for receiving and acting upon the expanded flat file? Can we follow processes consistent with paper applications (logging starts once the information is entered into the eligibility system)?
Yes, all the regulations and security constraints that apply to paper applications are necessary with the expanded flat file. The state would need to maintain the same level of security for the expanded flat file as they would in regard to paper applications.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:91941
SHARE URLWhat if an account contains an out of state address?
Applicants can apply for whatever state they choose. Sometimes someone will want to file an application for a state they don't currently live in. For example, if they are temporarily residing outside the state or have a family member or tax dependent that needs coverage who lives there. When an applicant applies on the Federally Facilitated Marketplace (FFM), they provide their home address and that information is used to validate the eligibility criteria of state residency during the eligibility determination process. If an applicant does not indicate they have a home address in the state they are applying to, and they do not indicate they are temporarily absent from the state, they will be denied Medicaid, CHIP and APTC for that state in accordance with state and federal rules. However, an applicant can always request a full determination, and in doing so, the account is transferred to the state indicated. In order to respond, the state will need to verify residency, and approve or deny Medicaid as applicable.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:91946
SHARE URLWhat if there is an account for someone who is already enrolled in Medicaid?
The flat file contains only accounts that have been determined/assessed as eligible for Medicaid or referred for a full determination at the applicant's request. If an individual applies at the FFM, is potentially eligible for Medicaid based on income, and does not indicate that he or she is currently enrolled in Medicaid, the FFM does not check for other coverage. The state would do a check with its system as they do when an applicant applies directly to the state and take appropriate action if the person is already enrolled.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:91951
SHARE URLUnder CMS 2370-F, may practice managers or billing staff of large group practices and health systems attest on behalf of their physicians on the basis of information on board certification in the records of the practice or health system?
If these practices and health systems maintain the types of documentation described in the previous answer, FAQ45736, with respect to managed care organizations, attestation by the group or system would be acceptable. As previously noted, a physician actually must be practicing as an internist, pediatrician or family physician in order to be eligible for higher payment. Board certification does not always equate to practice characteristics. Therefore, attestation on the basis of information on board certification alone would not suffice.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:93866
SHARE URLUnder CMS 2370-F, if a physician renders services in both the managed care and fee for service environments, must he or she self-attest to eligibility twice?
No. The attestation and eligibility are physician-specific. If a physician provides services both in a fee-for-service and managed care environment, they need only complete the process of attestation once in order to receive higher payment for all eligible services they provide. CMS expects all information on self-attestation to be fully available to the state, regardless of which party collected this information.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:93871
SHARE URLUnder CMS 2370, may physicians who practice in two (or more) states meet the 60 percent threshold based on all services provided in all states, or must they qualify on the basis of the services they provide in each state?
States have the flexibility to count eligible services provided by a physician in neighboring states in meeting the 60 percent threshold, but are not required to do so.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:93876
SHARE URLThere are at least two current procedural terminology (CPT) codes (99429 and 99499) for which there are no relative value units (RVU) and the state manually prices the services for purposes of Medicaid payment. Will CMS develop a Medicare-like rate for these codes under the CMS 2370-F rule?
These services would not be subject to the minimum payment standard set in the rule because there are no RVUs and there is no conversion factor associated with them. Therefore, a Medicare-like rate cannot be developed. The state may continue to reimburse them at the current Medicaid rate but enhanced federal financial participation (FFP) will not be available for those services.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:93881
SHARE URL
Results per page