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
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.
The Precertification Pilot was an experiment conducted from October 2017-March 2018 designed to streamline certification and attract new vendors. Unfortunately, the pilot was found to be unscalable across Medicaid. However, key learnings from the pilot will be incorporated into current processes and future experiments around vendor engagement, certification, scalability, and sustainability. The goals the Centers from Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) identified at the beginning of the Precertification Pilot process remain the same: reduce the level of effort of certification; shorten the certification timeline; promote modularity and interoperability; reduce risk of system failure; and attract new vendors to the Medicaid IT market. Contact CMS with your ideas for experiments to achieve those goals at MES@cms.hhs.gov.
The difference between a prospective and retrospective UPL is in the relationship between the UPL demonstration period and the date when the UPL is submitted. For a UPL demonstration period of 7/1/2018 to 6/30/2019, a UPL is considered retrospective when it is submitted on or after the start of the demonstration period (on or after 7/1/2018). Using the same UPL demonstration period (7/1/2018 to 6/30/2019), a UPL is considered prospective if it is submitted prior to 7/1/2018.
The UPL limits payment to the Medicare rate or cost. Providers paid at reconciled cost may receive no more than their reconciled amount. As a result, states cannot attribute the “UPL room” from other providers to pay additional amounts to any provider paid at reconciled cost. Due to this payment limitation, states should not include any provider paid at reconciled cost in their UPL demonstrations; however, they must account for these providers. Specifically, states must include with their UPL submissions documentation of those providers paid at reconciled cost and confirm by provider use of either a Medicare cost report or Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-approved cost report template to identify allowed cost. Further, states must document the ownership status (state owned, non-state government owned, or private) of each provider.
Dental services are not covered under Medicare, which means the state may not compare Medicaid rates for comparable dental services for the Medicare Equivalent of the ACR. The state may calculate a dental ACR in order to make supplemental payments to dental services providers and continue to calculate the Medicare Equivalent of the ACR for other services covered by Medicare. The state should submit two separate ACR demonstrations, one for dental services and one for physician (non-dental) services. This will involve completing two versions of the Office of Management and Budget-approved template. If the same provider provides both physician and dental services the state would differentiate the provider information between the two demonstrations by appending the Medicare Certification Number (Medicare ID) (variable 112) with a letter, such as an -A or a -B. For example, if the Medicare ID was 123456, it would be depicted in the physician ACR as 123456-A and in the dental ACR as 12345-B. If a Medicare Certification Number is not available then the state should append the Medicaid Provider Number.
Federal financial participation (FFP) limit demonstrations for durable medical equipment (DME) will be due 3 months after the end of the calendar year for the previous calendar year (i.e., January 1-December 31). The first DME FFP limit demonstration will be due by March 31, 2019 and will contain data for the period of January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018. This reporting period was selected to coincide with the effective date of the statute (January 1, 2018).
The statute does not compel states to set their payment rates for durable medical equipment (DME) at specific Medicare rates for each specific item. Instead, the statute applies a limit on available federal financial participation (FFP) for state aggregate expenditures. States have the flexibility to set their own rates for DME in the Medicaid program. If a state decides to set their Medicaid payment rates at or below Medicare rates in the state plan, the state should be specific about the fee schedule the state will use and be prepared to demonstrate that their rates do not exceed the amount Medicare would have paid in the aggregate, in order to avoid the annual FFP limit demonstration of aggregate expenditures. For the demonstration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will be using state-specific Medicare payment rates. With this limit of available FFP for the aggregate amount of DME, CMS will use either the Medicare rates specific to an area of the state for the services rendered in those areas, or the lowest of a state’s Medicare rates for comparison to the aggregate limit of FFP.
States are free to establish higher rates for particular items of DME if they determine that higher rates are needed under the Medicaid state plans. If, however, the aggregate expenditures would exceed the Medicare rates in the aggregate, federal financial participation (FFP) would be limited. States that determine that payments above Medicare aggregate totals are necessary may use state-funds to obtain particular items of DME. The statute specifically describes an aggregate limit on state expenditures only for purposes of paying FFP. Therefore, a state may pay more than the Medicare rate for a particular item of DME, and as long as the aggregate amount for all DME is not exceeded, no FFP is at risk. Even if the aggregate amount is exceeded, there is only a limit on FFP, and there is no limit on the use of state funds used on DME items.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services cannot delay implementation of the statute. Congress took specific action to move the effective date up to January 1, 2018, and we are unable to amend the effective date.