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 43 results

Should the rate of required exclusions be reported with the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure's Part 1 performance rate?

The measure excludes plan members who are not ambulatory from the measure rate, but it is not necessary to report the number of members excluded with the measure’s performance rate.

FAQ ID:89006

SHARE URL

Is a specific screening tool required for the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure?

No, a specific screening tool is not required for this measure. However, potential screening tools may include the Morse Fall Scale and timed Get-Up-And-Go test.

FAQ ID:89011

SHARE URL

What is the difference between a screening (Part 1) and a risk assessment (Part 2) for the purposes of calculating the Screening, Risk Assessment, and Plan of Care to Prevent Future Falls measure?

A falls screening is an evaluation of whether a Managed Long Term Services and Supports plan member has experienced a history of falls and/or problems with balance or gait. A falls risk assessment includes a balance/gait assessment and one other assessment component and should only be performed for members with a documented history of falls (at least two falls or one fall with injury in the past year).

FAQ ID:89016

SHARE URL

What was the traditional Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) program based on and how has it changed?

The traditional MEQC program at 42 CFR § 431.810 through 431.822 was originally designed to implement sections 1902(a)(4) “Administration Methods for Proper and Efficient Operation of the State Plan” and 1903(u) “Limitation of FFP for Erroneous Medical Assistance Expenditures” of the Social Security Act (the Act). The program required annual state reviews of Medicaid cases identified through a statistically valid statewide sample of cases selected from the state’s eligibility files. The reviews were conducted to determine whether the sampled cases meet applicable Medicaid eligibility requirements. The program evolved over time to allow states the option of selecting specific areas of focus within the Medicaid program for their annual MEQC reviews.

On July 5, 2017, CMS published a final regulation entitled “Changes to the Payment Error Rate Measurement (PERM) and Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) Programs (CMS-Medicaid Coordination of Benefits8- F).” This final rule updated the MEQC and PERM programs based on the changes to Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program eligibility requirements under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The new regulation has restructured the MEQC program into an ongoing series of pilots that states are required to conduct during the two off-years between triennial PERM review years. The MEQC portions of the regulation are now covered by 42 CFR §§ 431.800-820.

FAQ ID:93416

SHARE URL

What deliverables must states furnish to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) per the new Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) regulation?

The regulation requires states to submit a pilot planning document to CMS by November 1 of the year in which each state’s PERM review year ends. The pilot planning document must describe how states will conduct their active and negative case reviews and must be approved by CMS before the MEQC pilots can begin. In addition, the regulation requires states to submit case-level reports and corrective action plans to CMS by August 1 of the year after the MEQC review period ends. The specifications for the MEQC pilot planning documents are provided in the MEQC sub-regulatory guidance effective August 29, 2018. More details on the specifications of the case-level reports and corrective action plans are included in a second round of guidance, MEQC sub-regulatory guidance effective October 22, 2018.

FAQ ID:93421

SHARE URL

How will the Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) program be realigned under the final regulation issued July 5, 2017?

As reconfigured under the final regulation of July 5, 2017, MEQC will work in conjunction with the Payment Error Rate Measurement (PERM) program. In those years when states undergo their triennial PERM reviews, the states will not conduct MEQC pilots. The latter will only be required in the two off-years between PERM review years. CMS has restructured the MEQC program so that it more effectively complements the PERM program and provides states with the necessary flexibility and opportunity to target specific problems or high-interest areas during the two off-years of the PERM cycle.

FAQ ID:93146

SHARE URL

How does Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) differ from Payment Error Rate Measurement (PERM)?

The MEQC requirements on active case reviews generally mirror the requirements of the eligibility component of PERM reviews. The regulation requires that states perform reviews of a sample of active Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) cases to identify new eligibility approvals and renewals that were made in error. As in PERM, states will be required to submit case-level reports on the sampled cases they review and corrective action plans that describe steps taken to remediate the errors found.

However, in contrast to PERM, when states identify errors in their active Medicaid and CHIP cases, they will be required to undertake a payment review. This will consist of a review of all claims paid over the first three months after an erroneous eligibility determination was made, and a summary of the overstated or understated liability. States will in turn be required to submit adjustments to the amount of federal financial participation (FFP) claimed through the CMS-64 reporting process for Medicaid and the CMS-21 reporting process for CHIP. The adjustments are required for identified claims in which too much or too little FFP was received. There is no payment review or re-crediting requirement in PERM, although disallowance of FFP can be taken in states whose PERM error rate exceeds the national threshold of 3% based on a formula described at 42 CFR 431.1010. MEQC contains no such disallowance provision.

The MEQC program also contains one other significant element that is not found in PERM. Besides the requirement that states review at least 400 cases in their active case universe (including a minimum of 200 cases), MEQC requires states to review at least 400 negative case actions. At least 200 of these must be Medicaid and 200 must be CHIP. Negative case actions involve erroneous denials of Medicaid or CHIP eligibility or erroneous terminations from Medicaid or CHIP. This is an area with no PERM counterpart in which states will be developing case-level reporting and corrective actions. Negative case action reviews will not be triggered by PERM findings. Largely for this reason, the regulation requires that states pull their sample of these from the entire Medicaid and CHIP universe of cases. By sampling from the full range of Medicaid and CHIP cases, states should be able to obtain an overview of those sectors in their programs that may be especially vulnerable to improper denials or terminations.

FAQ ID:93196

SHARE URL

Is there a simplified Payment Error Rate Measurement (PERM)/Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC) timeline with milestone dates/cycles that can be provided to states (all cycles)?

The PERM/MEQC dates/cycles are as follows:

PERM Cycle* PERM Review Period MEQC Planning Document Due to CMS MEQC Review Period MEQC Case-Level Report on Findings and CAP Due to CMS
Cycle 1 July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018 November 1, 2018 January 1 – December 1, 2019 August 1, 2020
Cycle 2 July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019 November 1, 2019 January 1 – December 1, 2020 August 1, 2021
Cycle 3 July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020 November 1, 2020 January 1 – December 1, 2021 August 1, 2022

*??
CMS = Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
CAP = ??

FAQ ID:95156

SHARE URL

Are states only required to conduct Upper Payment Limit (UPL) demonstrations for services with approved state plan supplemental payment methodologies?

No, an upper payment limit demonstration considers all Medicaid payments (base and supplemental). States must conduct UPL demonstrations for the applicable services described in State Medicaid Director Letter (SMDL) 13-003 regardless of whether a state makes supplemental payments under the Medicaid state plan for the services.

FAQ ID:92191

SHARE URL

Does a health plan's submission of information from its full eligibility file, for the purpose of matching that information to the Medicaid eligibility file, violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy rules?

State laws determine what information is required of the health plans. A health plan's disclosure and use of information that is required to be submitted under state law - such as, information from insurer eligibility files sufficient to determine during what period any individual may be, or have been, covered by a health insurer and the nature of the coverage that is or was provided by the health insurer — is consistent with the HIPAA privacy provisions.

Under HIPAA, both the state Medicaid agency and most health insurers are covered entities and must comply with the HIPAA Privacy Rule in 45 CFR Part 160 and Part 164, Subparts A and E. In their capacities as covered entities under HIPAA, the state Medicaid agency and health insurers are restricted from using and disclosing protected health information (PHI), as that term is defined in 45 CFR section 160.103, other than as permitted or required by the HIPAA Privacy Rule. However, as relevant here:

  1. A covered entity may use or disclose PHI to the extent that such use or disclosure is required by law and the use or disclosure complies with and is limited to the relevant requirements of the law. (45 CFR 164.512(a)(1)) Under this provision, each covered entity must be limited to disclosing or using only the PHI necessary to meet the requirements of the law that compels the use or disclosure. Anything required to be disclosed by a law can be disclosed without violating HIPAA under the "required by law" provisions. Therefore, health insurers may disclose data elements in addition to the four minimum data elements, up to and including submission of an entire insurer eligibility file, to the extent such information is required to be submitted by state law. (45 CFR 164.512(a))
  2. Separately, a covered entity may use or disclose PHI, without the consent of an individual, for payment activities, including to facilitate payment. (45 CFR 164.502(a)(1) and 164.506) Under HIPAA, the term payment includes activities undertaken by a health plan to determine or fulfill its responsibility for coverage and provision of benefits under the health plan. These activities include determinations of eligibility or coverage, adjudication or subrogation of health benefits claims, and collection activities. (45 CFR 164.501) To the extent plans are releasing this information to the Medicaid program for payment purposes; this is a separate basis for disclosure under HIPAA.
  3. The HIPAA Privacy Rule generally requires covered entities to take reasonable steps to limit the use and disclosure of PHI to the minimum necessary to accomplish the intended purpose. (45 CFR 164.502(b)(1)) However, among other limited exceptions, the minimum necessary requirements do not apply to uses or disclosures that are required by law under 45 CFR 164.512(a).

Supplemental Links:

FAQ ID:91216

SHARE URL
Results per page