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 81 to 90 of 91 results

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

If 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 URL

What 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 URL

What 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 URL

What 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 URL

What if I encounter an account with a long Application_ID or Member_ID?

This issue has been identified to be resolved but the state can proceed to enroll these accounts. The expanded flat file will contain several other fields giving enough information to effectuate enrollment while this issue is resolved. We will work with states that believe they have a problem proceeding to enroll these applicants.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91961

SHARE URL

What are the new Federal Matching Rates (FMAPs) available under the Affordable Care Act and how do states qualify for them?

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:

FAQ ID:94071

SHARE URL

For purposes of determining if the newly eligible FMAP applies, how will CMS decide if benefits offered through a section 1115 demonstration meet a benchmark or benchmark equivalent standard?

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:

FAQ ID:94076

SHARE URL

What is the difference between the expansion state FMAP and the newly eligible FMAP, and which states qualify for the expansion state FMAP?

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:

FAQ ID:94081

SHARE URL
Results per page