Frequently Asked Questions

Yes, CMS requires states to use all of the OMB approved templates for their 2019 (07/01/2018 to 06/30/2019) UPL demonstrations submitted to meet the annual UPL reporting requirement and with State Plan Amendment (SPA) submissions. When submitting UPL demonstrations, 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.

FAQ ID:92196

No, CMS does not require any particular starting point within the fiscal year for the UPL demonstrations. This allows states the flexibility to develop UPL demonstrations that are tied to the provider payment periods described in the state plan payment methodologies for each service. For instance, if a state submits a state plan amendment to update provider payments as of October 1 of each year, the state would document that the SPA changes comply with the UPL for the period 10/1 - 9/30 of that payment year. The UPL must represent the entire payment year. Since UPL demonstrations usually rely on historic data that is projected into a payment year, this is consistent with past practices.

FAQ ID:92226

Yes, states may use UPL methodologies that are different from their payment methodologies. For example, a state may pay for inpatient hospital services using a Medicaid APR-DRG methodology, but use a cost methodology to compute the Medicare upper payment limit for its UPL demonstration.

FAQ ID:92386

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

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

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

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

FAQ ID:92871

The Review Tool Report is a feature CPOCs, SRTs, Senior Reviewers, Package Approvers, Package Disapprovers, and CMS Report Admins can utilize to see Package Reviewable Units, Reviewers, Reviewable Unit Assessment Values, and Notes.

Log in as CMS Point of Contact or Submission Review Team member. Under the "Records" tab, select "Submission Packages". Then select the link to the submission package. In the left panel, select "Review Tool Report". You may sort the reviews of all Review Team members by Package Reviewable Unit, Reviewer, Reviewable Unit Assessment Value, or Note/Assessments by utilizing the drop-down boxes. You also have the ability to export this report to Excel by selecting "Export to Excel."

FAQ ID:92876

Analyst Notes are a form of brief internal communication for the CMS Review Team. These notes are a part of the official record; however, State users are not able to see these notes. Analyst Notes are part of the Review Tool for each Reviewable Unit and the SRT or CPOC may view the notes from other Review Team members (depending on the type of note) within the Review Tool, and add his/her own notes.

The CMS Point of Contact or Submission Review Team members may add Analysts Notes through the Review Tool. The types of notes available are referenced in a table below. You will start by logging in as the CMS Point of Contact or Submission Review Team member, then going to the "Records" tab. Under the "Records" tab select "Submission Packages" and then select the link to the package. In the left panel select "Analyst Notes". You will then have the ability to search notes entered by Review Team Members.

FAQ ID:92881