Frequently Asked Questions

No. However, when identifying the measure’s denominator from the eligible population, there are a few cases in which you should not include member months. For example, do not include months when the plan member was residing in an institutional facility for the entire month (that is, there were no days in the month spent residing in the community). If a member died, do not include the month during which the member died and any subsequent months of enrollment in the measure’s denominator.

FAQ ID:91116

When calculating the measure’s numerator (number of admissions to an institution), do not include admissions that are direct transfers from another institution, admissions from the hospital that originated from an institution, or admissions for individuals who do not meet the continuous enrollment criteria. If the member’s admission resulted in death in the institution or death within one day of discharge from the institution, do not include the admission in the numerator.

FAQ ID:91121

Yes, people admitted to an institution who were residing in the community prior to their admission may include those residing in assisted living, adult foster care, or another setting that is not defined as an institution.

FAQ ID:91131

Yes, this measure is risk-adjusted, using risk stratification by age. Results are reported separately for four age groups (18-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85 and older) for each of the length of stay classifications (short-term stay, medium-term stay, and long-term stay).

FAQ ID:91136

In accordance with Medicare cost reporting, the state must use 12 months of cost data reported by each facility. With regard to payment data, the state should use actual amounts, to the extent available, then calculate a claims completion factor based on historic utilization. The state’s UPL submission must include an explanation of its methodology to estimate payments. The use of a claims completion factor provides a reasonable estimate of the amount that Medicare would pay for these services, consistent with the UPL as defined at 42 CFR 447.272.

FAQ ID:92446

Effective state fiscal year 2020, each state must submit a complete data set of payments to Medicaid providers, including providers paid at cost, as well as critical access hospitals. This would require states to submit cost and payment data to CMS that previously was not requested.

FAQ ID:92456

Generally, information from the Federal data services hub will only be sent in direct response to a call from the requesting entity. However, in the case of verifications conducted by DHS, there can be up to three steps to a verification, the second and third of which will not be in real time. If the step 1 query fails, the Federal data services hub will automatically invoke step 2, and the response may take up to several days. If step 2 fails, the Federal data services hub will notify the requesting entity which will need to submit additional documentation from the applicant for step 3. The step 3 response can take weeks. During this time, the Federal data services hub will regularly poll DHS to see if the response has come back.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 104.38 KB)

FAQ ID:93316

The Precertification Pilot was an experiment conducted from October 2017-March 2018 designed to streamline certification and attract new vendors. Unfortunately, the pilot was found to be unscalable across Medicaid. However, key learnings from the pilot will be incorporated into current processes and future experiments around vendor engagement, certification, scalability, and sustainability. The goals the Centers from Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) identified at the beginning of the Precertification Pilot process remain the same: reduce the level of effort of certification; shorten the certification timeline; promote modularity and interoperability; reduce risk of system failure; and attract new vendors to the Medicaid IT market. Contact CMS with your ideas for experiments to achieve those goals at MES@cms.hhs.gov.

FAQ ID:95151

The difference between a prospective and retrospective UPL is in the relationship between the UPL demonstration period and the date when the UPL is submitted. For a UPL demonstration period of 7/1/2018 to 6/30/2019, a UPL is considered retrospective when it is submitted on or after the start of the demonstration period (on or after 7/1/2018). Using the same UPL demonstration period (7/1/2018 to 6/30/2019), a UPL is considered prospective if it is submitted prior to 7/1/2018.

FAQ ID:92431

The UPL limits payment to the Medicare rate or cost. Providers paid at reconciled cost may receive no more than their reconciled amount. As a result, states cannot attribute the “UPL room” from other providers to pay additional amounts to any provider paid at reconciled cost. Due to this payment limitation, states should not include any provider paid at reconciled cost in their UPL demonstrations; however, they must account for these providers. Specifically, states must include with their UPL submissions documentation of those providers paid at reconciled cost and confirm by provider use of either a Medicare cost report or Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-approved cost report template to identify allowed cost. Further, states must document the ownership status (state owned, non-state government owned, or private) of each provider.

FAQ ID:92436