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.
Frequently Asked Questions
In our state, advanced practice nurses must have a collaborative practice agreement with a physician within 50 miles of their office. Under the collaborative practice agreement, a physician must review a certain percentage of the nurse's patient charts every 2 weeks. Such nurses bill independently using their own Medicaid number. Is the collaborative practice agreement enough documentation for an advance practice nurse, with at least 60 percent of services billed by the nurse for calendar year (CY) 2012 for
Increased payment is available for services provided by eligible physicians or for services provided under their personal supervision. This means that the physician accepts professional responsibility (and legal liability) for the services provided. It does not appear that the collaborative arrangement requires that the physician accept professional responsibility for each of the services provided by the nurses. Therefore, increased payment would not be available.
However, if the physician is required to accept professional responsibility for the services provided by the advanced practice nurses and the physician is eligible based on self-attestation to a specified primary care specialty designation supported by either appropriate Board certification or a 60 percent claims history, then increased payment would be available.
Supplemental Links:
FAQ ID:92706
SHARE URLIf the supervising physician does not self-attest to the physician specialty or subspecialty qualification under CMS 2370-F, can the physician supervise a mid-level provider? If the supervising physician self-attests to the 60 percent threshold, but not one of the defined specialty or subspecialty qualifications, can the physician supervise a mid-level?
The eligibility of services provided by mid-level/non-physician practitioners is dependent on 1) the eligibility of the physician and 2) whether or not the physician accepts professional responsibility for the services provided by the mid-level. As previously noted, physicians are eligible only if they first self-attest to a specified specialty designation and also to either being appropriately Board certified or having a 60 percent claims history.
Supplemental Links:
ÂFAQ ID:92711
SHARE URLIs it permissible for states with Medicare geographic adjustments that opt to develop rates based on the mean Medicare rate over all counties for each Evaluation & Management code under CMS 2370-F to use a weighted mean based on either the county population or the county Medicaid enrollment?
We believe this would be acceptable. However, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) would review the methodology as part of the SPA approval process.
Supplemental Links:
ÂFAQ ID:92716
SHARE URLIf a state were to proceed with implementation on January 1, 2013, and submit a state plan by March 31, 2013, would the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) permit the state to claim the enhanced match for services that were reimbursed at the higher rate under CMS 2370-F prior to approval of the state plan?
No. As noted in the final rule, Federal Financial Participation (FFP) in increased rates will not be available until the State Plan Amendment (SPA) is approved.
Supplemental Links:
ÂFAQ ID:92721
SHARE URLHow does the Supreme Court ruling affect the interaction between the Exchanges and Medicaid? Will a state's decision whether or not to proceed with the Medicaid expansion have implications for the Exchange's ability to make Medicaid eligibility determinations?
As the letter from Secretary Sebelius to Governors sent on July 10, 2012 and the letter from the CMS Acting Administrator Marilyn Tavenner sent on July 13, 2012 stated, the Supreme Court's decision affects the financial penalty that applies to a state that does not expand Medicaid coverage to 133% of the federal poverty level under the Affordable Care Act. No other provisions of the law were affected. Thus regardless of whether a state adopts the Medicaid expansion, the provisions related to coordination with the Exchange, including the use of standard income eligibility methods, apply. An Exchange in each state will make either a Medicaid eligibility determination or a Medicaid eligibility assessment (at the state's option) based on the Medicaid rules in the state, including the income levels at which the state's Medicaid program provides coverage.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94581
SHARE URLWill low-income residents in states that do not expand Medicaid to 133 percent of the FPL be eligible for cost sharing subsidies and tax credits to purchase coverage through an Exchange?
Yes, in part. Individuals with incomes above 100 percent of the federal poverty level who are not eligible for Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) or other minimum essential coverage will be eligible for premium tax credits and cost sharing reductions, assuming they also meet other requirements to purchase coverage in the Exchanges.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94596
SHARE URLWhat specific plans and timeline do you have for enacting the reforms and flexibility options for Medicaid that you spoke of in 2009? When can states give further input on the needed reforms?
CMS continues to work closely with states to provide options and tools that make it easier for states to make changes in their Medicaid programs to improve care and lower costs. In the last six months, we have released guidance giving states flexibility in structuring payments to better incentivize higher-quality and lower-cost care, provided enhanced matching funds for health home care coordination services for those with chronic illnesses, designed new templates to make it easier to submit section 1115 demonstrations and to make it easier for a state to adopt selective contracting in the program, and developed a detailed tool to help support states interested in extending managed care arrangements to long term services and supports. We have also established six learning collaboratives with states to consider together improvements in data analytics, value-based purchasing and other topics of key concern to states and stakeholders, and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has released several new initiatives to test new models of care relating to Medicaid populations. Information about these and many other initiatives are available on Medicaid.gov. We welcome continued input and ideas from states and others. States can implement delivery system and payment reforms in their programs whether or not they adopt the low-income adult expansion. With respect to the expansion group in particular, states have considerable flexibility regarding coverage for these individuals. For example, states can choose a benefit package benchmarked to a commercial package or design an equivalent package. States also have significant cost-sharing flexibility for individuals above 100% of the federal poverty level, and we intend to propose other cost-sharing changes that will modernize and update our rules.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94606
SHARE URLWill the federal government support options for the Medicaid expansion population that encourage personal responsibility?
Yes, depending on its design. We are interested in working with states to promote better health and health care at lower costs and have been supporting, under a demonstration established by the Affordable Care Act, state initiatives that are specifically aimed at promoting healthy behaviors. Promoting better health and healthier behaviors is a matter of importance to the health care system generally, and state Medicaid programs, like other payers, can shape their benefit design to encourage such behaviors while ensuring that the lowest income Americans have access to affordable quality care. We invite states to continue to come to us with their ideas, including those that promote value and individual ownership in health care decisions as well as accountability tied to improvement in health outcomes. We note in particular that states have considerable flexibility under the law to design benefits for the new adult group and to impose cost-sharing, particularly for those individuals above 100% of the federal poverty level, to accomplish these objectives, including Secretary-approved benchmark coverage.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94611
SHARE URLWill CMS approve global waivers with an aggregate allotment, state flexibility, and accountability if states are willing to initiate a portion of the expansion?
Consistent with the guidance provided above with respect to demonstrations available under the regular and the enhanced matching rates, CMS will work with states on their proposals and review them consistent with the statutory standard of furthering the interests of the program.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94616
SHARE URLThe Disproportionate Share Hospital allotments will be reduced starting in 2014 using a methodology based on the reduction in the number of uninsured. One, when will HHS issue the regulations and methodology for this reduction? Two, for a state that does not see a decrease in its uninsured population, will the remaining states absorb the full reduction? Is HHS planning any modification to the manner in which it will reduce DSH allotments as it relates to states that do not expand?
The law directs HHS to develop a methodology to reduce Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) funding over time in a way that is linked to reductions in the number of uninsured or how states target their funds. We have heard from states and health care providers about their concerns related to this change and are exploring all options. The Department will propose this methodology for public comment early next year.
Supplemental Links:
- This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 359.41 KB)
FAQ ID:94626
SHARE URL
Results per page