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 40 results

What is the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A -87 Exception?

OMB Circular A-87requires costs associated with building shared state-based Information Technology (IT) systems that support multiple health and human service programs be allocated across all benefitting programs in proportion to their use of the system. The OMB A-87 Exception revised this approach by allowing human service programs (e.g. SNAP, TANF, LIHEAP, etc.) and others to utilize a wide range of IT components, needed by Medicaid but also of use to these other programs, at no additional cost except for interfaces or other uniquely required services specific to those programs. The A-87 Exception applies only to design, development, and implementation. Maintenance and operations work should continue to be allocated in accordance with the A-87 Circular. OMB Circular A-87  â€“ Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments, has been Relocated to 2 CFR, Part 225 .

FAQ ID:93611

When does the OMB A-87 Exception expire?

On July 20, 2015, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a three-year extension of the Exception to the OMB A-87 cost allocation requirements from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2018. We are currently making plans for the OMB A-87 exception to end.

FAQ ID:93616

What is the impact of the OMB A-87 expiration for states utilizing the exception for system integration development?

States will need to incur costs for goods and services furnished no later than December 31, 2018 to make use of this Exception. Therefore, if work is completed by December 31, 2018, it can be funded under the OMB A-87 Exception and states should follow typical invoicing and claiming processes. However, if an amount has been obligated by December 31, 2018, but the good or service is not furnished by that date, then such expenditure must be cost allocated by program in proportion to their use of the system in accordance with OMB A-87.

FAQ ID:93621

How should states account for OMB A-87 exception in their Advance Planning Documents (APD)

For FFY2019 annual APDs and budget tables, including the Medicaid Detailed Budget Table (MDBT), must be completed as follows:

  • For Q1 FFY2019, states can allocate costs in accordance with the OMB A-87 Exception
  • For Q2-Q$ FFY2019, and all APDs going forward, states should allocate costs as required under the OMB A-87 Circular

If a state has already submitted their annual APDs without providing separate budgets they will need to complete an APDU with a revised MDBT and cost allocation plan. The update should address how cost allocation will be done prior to, and after, December 31, 2018. Budget tables should be completed as described above.

The Data and Systems Group (DSG) that approves APDs does not approve cost allocation methodology. States working to develop their new methodologies should send operational cost allocation plans to Cost Allocation Services  and the regional office fiscal staff for all benefiting programs.

FAQ ID:93626

Providers are permitted to charge a copay for a member's office visit. This visit may include a variety of services including preventive and non-preventive services. The State Medical Director (SMD) letter indicates the enhanced federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) is available if cost-sharing is eliminated for preventive services. We believe this to mean that the doctor cannot collect a copay for any visit in which preventive services are provided, regardless of whether the majority of services provided during the visit are non-preventive services. We would like CMS verification.

If the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) grade A or B service is an integral part of the office visit that includes other services, and will not be billed separately, the state may permit providers to charge a copay for the office visit, as the office visit is not eligible for the one percentage point FMAP increase. If the USPSTF grade A or B service is billed separately, or is the only service furnished during the office visit, the state may not permit the provider to charge a copay. The state should work with providers to establish the appropriate billing codes and claims processing guidelines for these situations.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92121

Under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act, is there a modifier to assist providers, payers and states in identifying preventive services?

The American Medical Association created modifier 33 in response to the Affordable Care Act requirements pertaining to preventive services. When the primary purpose of the service is the delivery of an evidence-based service in accordance with a United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) A or B rating in effect and other preventive services identified in preventive services mandates (legislative or regulatory), the service may be identified by appending modifier 33, preventive service, to the service. For separately reported services specifically identified as preventive, the modifier should not be used.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91991

Under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act, if the preventive service is bundled with other services, and the bundled service includes more than one preventive service, may the state allocate the bundled payment among the included services and claim the enhanced match for each of the preventive services? For example, in an annual exam, the physician provides both obesity counseling and alcohol misuse counseling. Can the state submit a claim for both the obesity counseling and the alcohol counseling?

It is up to the state to set up its payment methodologies and procedures. To the extent that the state processes a claim for a United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) grade A or B preventive service consistent with those procedures, it can claim the enhanced match for that claim. If the state elects a payment methodology using bundled services, generally it cannot claim the enhanced match. But there may be some instances in which it might be appropriate to allocate costs for bundled claims among the included components. To the extent that a state is interested in doing so, it must develop a cost allocation plan, and submit that for CMS approval.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91996

Under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act, are states required to follow only the summary of recommendations, or other information in the recommendation statement such as frequency? If the latter, reviewing potentially a ten-year claims history (e.g. for a colonoscopy) will be extremely burdensome.

Provided that the services are medically necessary, states are required to follow only the summary of recommendations for the services that have a rating of A or B from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). It is up to the state to have a financial monitoring procedure to ensure proper claiming for federal match.

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92006

Under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act, for breast screenings, may the state claim the interpretation of the x-ray for the one percentage point federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) increase, or can only the x-ray itself be claimed?

The state may claim the 1% FMAP increase on both the professional component (interpretation of the x-ray) and the technical component (the actual taking of the x-ray).

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92011

Under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act, what information is being required for the CMS-64 reporting requirement to claim the increased federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) for managed care expenditures?

States seeking the one percentage point FMAP increase should amend their state plans to reflect that they cover and reimburse all United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) grade A and B preventive services and approved vaccines recommended by Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), and their administration, without cost-sharing. An approved state plan amendment is required for the lines to be enterable on the CMS-64 form. As with all other services claimed on the CMS-64, the amounts reported on and its attachments must be actual expenditures for which all supporting documentation, in readily reviewable form, has been compiled and is available immediately at the time the claim is filed. The CMS-64 report form has been modified to allow for reporting of a state's managed care expenditures separate from the state's reporting of fee-for-service (FFS) expenditures. The total expenditures associated with services referenced in section 4106 would be reported on the requisite lines for managed care (line 18A4, 18B1d or 18B2d) and for FFS (line 34A).

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:92021

Results per page