Frequently Asked Questions

We do not believe the statue requires states to cover, under this group, individuals who were in foster care and enrolled in Medicaid when they turned age 18 or aged out of foster care in a different state. However, we believe the statute provides states the option to do so. As noted above, pending publication of a final regulation at section 435.150, states may exercise the option proposed when they complete SPA page S33 for this group.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:92166

Yes. Section 115 of CHIPRA gives states the option to claim expenditures for Medicaid expansion program populations under section 1905(u)(2)(B) of the Act, either at the enhanced FMAP rate using title XXI funds or at the regular FMAP rate using title XIX funds. States that elect to claim expenditures under title XXI will receive the enhanced FMAP rate. However, states that elect to claim expenditures under title XIX will receive the regular Medicaid FMAP rate. Claims submitted at the enhanced FMAP rate will be paid from the state's CHIP allotment.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 120.92 KB)

FAQ ID:92171

Yes, services covered under the state plan rendered during the PE period will qualify for federal match regardless of the ultimate Medicaid eligibility decision. The standards that states can set for hospitals and the findings from reviews of hospital performance relative to those standards are intended to ensure that hospitals are making appropriate PE determinations and following state hospital PE procedures. When problems are identified, states should take corrective action to ensure future compliance with state policies and procedures.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 151.09 KB)

FAQ ID:92111

Yes, the templates allow the use of multiple cost centers. For example, if the state uses a cost methodology for ancillary services and a per-diem methodology for routine services, the state will complete one cost template and one per-diem template in order to account for these two cost centers. Every hospital would be featured in each of the two templates; however, to differentiate their provider information, the state would append the Medicare Certification Number (Medicare ID) (variable 112) with a letter, such as an -A or a -B. For example, if the Medicare ID was 123456, it would be depicted in the cost template as 123456-A and in the per diem template as 123456-B. If a Medicare Certification Number is not available then the state should append the Medicaid Provider Number. If there are multiple cost centers under either the cost or per-diem methodology, the state would separate out the cost centers within their respective templates. Each cost center should be associated with only one appended letter and these should be described in the notes tab. When using multiple cost centers, the state should insert a new tab in the templates that summarizes the UPL gap calculations for each of the ownership categories (state government owned, non-state government owned, and private), unless a summary worksheet is already included in the workbook.

FAQ ID:92261

Yes, the template allows the use of multiple cost centers with multiple cost-to-charge ratios. The state would separately report the costs and payments associated with each of the cost centers in the cost template. To differentiate the cost centers, the state would append the Medicare Certification Number (Medicare ID) (variable 112) with a letter, for example an -A, -B, or -C, that would be used as a unique identifier for each cost center.

FAQ ID:92266

Yes, the templates allow the use of multiple methodologies. The state would complete the templates associated with the UPL methodologies used. For example, if the state uses a cost-based methodology for state owned hospitals and a payment-based methodology for private hospitals, then the state would complete the cost template for the state owned hospitals and the payment template for the private hospitals. When using multiple methodologies, the state should insert a new tab in the templates that summarizes the UPL gap calculations for each of the ownership categories (state government owned, non-state government owned, and private), unless a summary worksheet is already included in the workbook.

FAQ ID:92271

The cost of the tax should be reported in Variable 401 - MCD Provider Tax Cost. A state may separately report the Medicaid portion of the cost of a provider assessment/tax only when it is using a cost based methodology to calculate the UPL. A state may not include this cost when calculating a DRG or Payment based UPL demonstration.

FAQ ID:92366

States have the option to require hospitals to assist individuals in submitting the full application, which can help connect more people to longer-term coverage. While we encourage states to do so, to promote ongoing coverage, as noted above, a full application cannot be required as a condition of receiving a hospital PE determination, as the purpose of PE is to promote quick access to care on an interim basis while the full application process is underway. States can strike a reasonable balance by using the full application for hospital PE determinations, but clearly delineating which questions are necessary for PE purposes. States and hospitals can also use inserts or additional language to differentiate between the hospital PE application and the full application.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 151.09 KB)

FAQ ID:91581

Real-time eligibility determinations make the role of PE different than it has been in the past. In situations in which the individual files a full application right away, the PE period would likely be considerably shorter-and eliminated altogether, as a practical matter, if a real-time determination is made. However, even with the most modernized systems, there invariably will be individuals for whom a real-time eligibility determination will not be possible. There also will be individuals who will not be comfortable with the online application, or ready with the information needed to complete a full online application and will instead opt to apply later or use a paper application. In such situations and for such individuals, PE remains a useful tool to facilitate prompt coverage and enrollment in the program. States have flexibility to in effect minimize the length of the PE periods by requiring that hospitals and other qualified entities assist individuals in submitting the single streamlined application online, as long as the individual is not required to submit the full application online as a condition of qualifying for PE.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 151.09 KB)

FAQ ID:91586

Yes. A simplified method of determining income (e.g., using use of gross income rather than or other simplified approximation of MAGI) per 42 CFR 435.1102(a) is permitted for all types of PE. Our regulations at 42 CFR 435.1102(a) discuss the use of simplified income methods and clearly state that full MAGI-based eligibility determinations cannot be used to determine PE. This requirement applies to all forms of PE, including hospital PE, per 42 CFR 435.1103(a) and 435.1110(a).

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 151.09 KB)

FAQ ID:91591