Frequently Asked Questions

Use the most recently updated care plan.

FAQ ID:89151

To meet the LTSS Comprehensive Care Plan and Update measure numerator, the care plan must be signed by the member, unless the care plan is under appeal in the specified timeframe, and there is documentation that the care plan was in appeal. There is an exclusion for members who refuse to take part in care planning. This exclusion is reported with the measure rate, so the overall measure rate can be interpreted correctly. For example, a plan that is not successful at engaging members in care planning, indicated by a high exclusion rate, would suggest the overall rate on the measure should be interpreted with caution.

FAQ ID:89166

There must be documentation that at least three attempts were made to reach the member, and they could not be reached. The rate of exclusion due to inability to reach a member should also be reported along with the measure performance rate.

FAQ ID:89176

In these circumstances, MLTSS plan records should clearly document that no caregiver was involved to satisfy the measure criteria. For example, there are situations in which it may not be appropriate to engage the caregiver, including cases in which the member refused to involve the caregiver, or the invited caregiver declined to participate. Reasons for lack of caregiver involvement are not required; documentation that a caregiver was not involved suffices.

FAQ ID:89181

For certain elements of the care plan, documentation of no deficit suffices to receive credit for the elements (for example, functional needs, medical needs, cognitive impairment needs). Other elements in the core and supplemental rates of the Managed Long Term Services and Supports (MLTSS) LTSS Comprehensive Care Plan and Update measure require documentation regardless of whether a deficit is identified (for example, individualized member goal, plan for follow-up and communication, plan for emergency). Refer to the details in the measure specification to identify where documentation of no deficit meets the element definition.

FAQ ID:89196

CMS understands that many managed care contracts include a general provision that incorporates changes in federal law during the course of the contract term. Amendments to approved contracts, or contracts under CMS review, for the purpose of updating regulatory citations is not necessary. However, the citations will need to be updated for the next contract year. Outdated regulatory citations in contracts without such a general provision will need to be updated for the next contract year.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 185.26 KB)

FAQ ID:93426

No. If a state does not have a state law or policy that requires CMS approval of the contract and capitation rates prior to the effective date of the contract, the 90 day timeframe is not applicable. However, as a general matter, states should submit the contracts and rates 90 days prior to the start of the contract term. CMS intends to provide future guidance on the prior approval requirements as a condition of claiming FFP in section 438.806, which are distinct from the requirements at section 438.3(a).

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 185.26 KB)

FAQ ID:93431

There is a technical error in section 438.210(a)(2) as the cross-reference should have incorporated subpart B of part 441 rather than subpart B of part 440. All Medicaid beneficiaries under age 21 are entitled to EPSDT services, whether they are enrolled in a managed care plan or they are in fee-for-service. Under section 1905(r) of the Social Security Act (the Act), EPSDT services must include ""[s]uch other necessary health care, diagnostic services, treatment, and other measures described in section 1905(a) to correct or ameliorate defects and physical and mental illness and conditions discovered by the screening services, whether or not such services are covered under the State plan."" CMS intends to issue a regulatory correction to address this error. We also want to remind readers that sections 1902(a)(43) and 1905(r)(5) of the Act are applicable to the provision of EPSDT, despite not being expressly incorporated in part 441. Detailed guidance on EPSDT can be found in ""EPSDT"" A Guide for States: Coverage in the Medicaid benefit for Children and Adolescents, June 2014, available at https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/benefits/downloads/epsdt_coverage_guide.pdf (PDF, 613.1 KB).

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 185.26 KB)

FAQ ID:93436

No. CMS addressed this provision at page 27569 of the Final Rule. Section 438.4(b)(5) does not require there to be different assumptions (such as trend or age, gender, or regional rating) for each rate cell and does not prevent the use of the same assumptions across more than one rate cell. The prohibition on cross-subsidization among rate cells under the contact is to ensure prudent fiscal management and that the capitation rate for each rate cell is independently actuarially sound.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 185.26 KB)

FAQ ID:93441

No. For the rating periods for contracts starting on or after July 1, 2017, managed care plans may not maintain more than one level of appeal. Section 438.402(b) requires that MCOs, PIHPs, and PAHPs ""may have only one level of appeal for enrollees."" Note that states may modify managed care contracts to require managed care plans to provide one level of internal appeal in advance of the rating period for contracts starting on or after July 1, 2017, as subpart F in the 2002 final rule permitted states flexibility as to the number of internal appeals. Please see page 27509 of the Final Rule for additional explanatory information.

Supplemental Links:

• This FAQ was released as part of a larger set. View the full set. (PDF, 185.26 KB)

FAQ ID:93446