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 1 to 10 of 44 results

Do the data elements comprising the falls risk assessment need to be documented as part of a comprehensive assessment?

No. Although a comprehensive assessment may include falls risk assessment elements, this measure does not require the risk assessment elements to be documented as part of a comprehensive assessment. For this measure, a falls risk assessment is considered complete if the member record includes any documentation of a balance/gait assessment, and documentation of assessment of postural blood pressure, vision, home fall hazards, and/or medications.

FAQ ID:88961

SHARE URL

Do the components of the risk assessment need to be completed during a single encounter?

No, the components can be completed during separate encounters, provided they are documented in the member record as having been performed between August 1 of the year prior to the measurement year and December 31 of the measurement year.

FAQ ID:88966

SHARE URL

Is a standardized tool required for assessment of balance/gait?

No, a standardized tool is not required, although documentation of use of a standardized tool (for example, Get Up & Go, Berg, Tinetti) would meet the balance/gait assessment component of the measure.

FAQ ID:88971

SHARE URL

Can the same standardized tool be used to conduct screening (Part 1) and risk assessment (Part 2)?

Yes, the same tool may be used to conduct the screening and risk assessment for the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure.

FAQ ID:88986

SHARE URL

Do the data elements comprising the plan of care to prevent future falls need to be documented as part of a comprehensive care plan?

No. Although a comprehensive care plan may include the elements comprising a plan of care to prevent future falls, the measure does not require the plan of care elements to be documented as part of a comprehensive care plan. For this measure, a plan of care is considered complete if the member record includes any documentation of exercise therapy or referral to exercise between August 1 of the year prior to the measurement year and December 31 of the measurement year.

FAQ ID:88991

SHARE URL

Should the rate of required exclusions be reported with the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure's Part 2 performance rate?

Yes, the rate of exclusion for members who refused an assessment and/or a plan of care needs to be reported with the measure’s performance rate.

FAQ ID:88996

SHARE URL

Can the same sample for Part 2 of the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure be used for other measures?

No, the sample for Part 2 of the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure is different from the systematic sample used for the LTSS Comprehensive Assessment and Update, LTSS Comprehensive Care Plan and Update, LTSS Shared Care Plan with Primary Care Practitioner, and Part 1 of the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measures. Members included in the sample for Part 2 of this measure must have a documented history of falls (at least two falls or one fall with injury in the past year), including documentation of plan member self-reported history of falls.

FAQ ID:89001

SHARE URL

Please clarify that state flexibility to reimburse in the aggregate extends to reimbursement rates for I/T/U pharmacies and FSS drugs, and that states can establish rates that are based on a variety of data sources, which may include FSS prices, national and State price surveys, AMP data, and other price benchmarks.

The new AAC requirements were designed to more accurately reflect the pharmacy providers' actual prices paid to acquire drugs and the professional services required to fill a prescription. We agree that each state is able to establish rates that satisfy (or are consistent with) AAC and may be based on a variety of data sources, which may include FSS prices, and other pricing benchmarks.

FAQ ID:95111

SHARE URL

If a state can prove that they are under the aggregate limits of AAC and PDF and have strong participation by pharmacies, are they required to adopt the AAC and PDF reimbursement methodology at the individual claim level?

All states are required to adopt the AAC and professional dispensing fee methodology; however, it is not required to be adopted at the individual claim level, but in the aggregate. In accordance with the regulatory requirements at 42 CFR 447.512(b), the state is responsible for establishing a payment methodology, that must not exceed, in the aggregate, payment levels that the agency has determined by applying the lower of the AAC plus a professional dispensing fee or the providers' usual and customary charges to the general public. In conjunction with this the state is also responsible to ensure that pharmacy reimbursement is consistent

Supplemental Links:

with the requirements of section 1902(a)(30)(A) of the Act, which specify that provider reimbursement rates should be consistent with efficiency, economy, and quality of care while assuring sufficient beneficiary access.

FAQ ID:94691

SHARE URL

If a state is already using actual acquisition cost (AAC) as their reimbursement methodology, does the state need to file a State Plan Amendment (SPA) or provide assurances that the current formula meets requirements established in the final rule? Is there a requirement for such states to file a SPA to provide assurance that the state's current dispensing fee amount meets the requirements of the final rule?

If a state is already making payment for prescription drugs under its state plan based on AAC, it may continue to use that methodology. However, if a state decides to change its AAC model of reimbursement, (e.g., the state decides to use the National Average Drug Acquisition Cost (NADAC) instead of a state survey to implement a payment methodology based on AAC), the state must submit a new SPA through the formal SPA process for review.

Additionally, the state should review its currently approved professional dispensing fee (PDF) to determine if, in light of the regulation (42 CFR 447.518), the PDF needs to be revised and a SPA needs to be submitted. The state does not have to submit a new SPA to provide assurance that its dispensing fee is reasonable.

Furthermore, we expect that all states, even those currently operating under an AAC reimbursement methodology, will evaluate their current state plans to determine if a SPA will be required to comply with the reimbursement requirements (including, but not limited to, AAC, PDF, 340B and the federal upper limits (FULs)).

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:94671

SHARE URL
Results per page