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
Medicare regulations at 42 CFR section 424.44(b) allow for the following exceptions to the 1 calendar year time limit for filing fee for service claims:
- Administrative error, if failure to meet the filing deadline was caused by error or misrepresentation of an employee, Medicare contractor, or agent of the Department that was performing Medicare functions and acting within the scope of its authority.
- Retroactive Medicare entitlement, where a beneficiary receives notification of Medicare entitlement retroactive to or before the date the service was furnished. For example, at the time services were furnished the beneficiary was not entitled to Medicare. However, after the timely filing period has expired, the beneficiary subsequently receives notification of Medicare entitlement effective retroactively to or before the date of the furnished service.
- Retroactive Medicare entitlement involving state Medicaid agencies, where a state Medicaid agency recoups payment from a provider or supplier 6 months or more after the date the service was furnished to a dually eligible beneficiary. For example, at the time the service was furnished, the beneficiary was only entitled to Medicaid and not to Medicare. Subsequently, the beneficiary receives notification of Medicare entitlement effective retroactively to or before the date of the furnished service. The state Medicaid agency recoups its money from the provider or supplier and the provider or supplier cannot submit the claim to Medicare, because the timely filing limit has expired.
- Retroactive disenrollment from a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan or Program of All-inclusive Care of the Elderly (PACE) provider organization, where a beneficiary was enrolled in an MA plan or PACE provider organization, but later was disenrolled from the MA plan or PACE provider organization retroactive to or before the date the service was furnished, and the MA plan or PACE provider organization recoups its payment from a provider or supplier 6 months or more after the date the service was furnished.
Supplemental Links:
No. Based upon federal authority set forth at 10 U.S.C. section 1103, Congress explicitly provided for preemption of state and local laws pertaining to health care financing methods for a contract entered into for medical and/or dental care, under Chapter 55 of the Armed Forces Title of the U.S. Code, by the Secretary of Defense or administering Department of Defense secretaries. The preemption applies to contracts entered into for the purpose of administering TRICARE. Thus, it is the position of the Department of Defense that TRICARE's 1-year timely filing limit is not superseded by the 3-year limit established in the DRA for health insurers who are regulated by the states, and that TRICARE is exempt, not only from the DRA timely filing requirements, but from the DRA requirements altogether.
Supplemental Links:
Yes. There is a significant amount of third party coverage derived from health plans licensed in a different state than where the Medicaid beneficiary resides. This can commonly happen when the policyholder works in one state and lives in another state. For example, there may be policyholders who are enrolled in Medicaid coverage in Maryland, or have dependents that are enrolled, who work in Delaware, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, or West Virginia and also have coverage through their employer in that state. This highlights the need for Medicaid agencies to obtain plan eligibility information from contiguous states in addition to collecting information in their respective state.
Another example is when Medicaid-eligible children are covered by the insurance plan of non-custodial parents who live in a different state than their child(ren). This example is not limited to contiguous states because non-custodial parents could reside in any state in the country. Depending on the size, it may be beneficial for the state to obtain the plan's entire eligibility file. The specific geographical areas to be included in the data exchange should be negotiated with the plans. We recommend use of a Trading Partner Agreement in the exchange of electronic data.
Finally, section 1902(a)(25)(I)(i) of the Social Security Act directs states, as a condition of receiving federal financial participation (FFP) for Medicaid, to have laws in effect that require health insurers doing business in their state to provide the state with the requisite information with respect to individuals who are eligible for, or are provided medical assistance, i.e., Medicaid beneficiaries. State law cannot reach beyond the entities that are "doing business"in their states.
Supplemental Links:
Generally, the purpose of the 1202 payment increase is to directly benefit physicians performing primary care services. In the instance of salaried physicians, including those working for clinics or other employing organizations that bill on the Medicaid physician fee schedule, this could come in the form of an increased salary. Alternatively, where there is an employment agreement between the physician and the employing entity, the employment agreement might account for the payment increase by noting that the physician accepts his or her salary as payment in full, regardless of Medicaid reimbursement levels.
To the extent that physicians are already receiving payment for Medicaid services that is at least equal to the Medicare rate as required under section 1202 of the ACA, no additional payment under section 1202 should be made to either a managed care health plan or to a group practice or similar organization that employs physicians. The additional payment is to ensure that payment to the physician is at least equal to the 1202 Medicare rate.
States that pay for vaccine administration using the vaccine product codes were required to include a crosswalk to their administration codes as part of their ACA 1202 state plan amendment (SPA). They will therefore be required to submit a new SPA to reflect any changes in those codes. If a state does not use vaccine product codes to pay for vaccine administration and therefore there is no crosswalk in their 1202 SPA, then no updates are necessary to reflect the code changes.
Yes. The original SPAs contained a list of codes that had been added since 2009 that the state was planning on reimbursing at the higher ACA 1202 rate. Therefore, if a state adds codes, it should submit a revised SPA page, updating that list of codes eligible for higher payment.
In qualifying states, certain United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) grade A or B preventive services and vaccine administration codes are eligible for a one percent FMAP increase under section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act (which amended sections 1902(a)(13) and 1905(b) of the Act). Some of these services may also qualify as a primary care services eligible for an increase in the payment rates under section 1202 of the Affordable Care Act. For these services the federal matching rate is 100 percent for the difference between the Medicaid rate as of July 1, 2009 and the payment made pursuant to section 1202 (the increase). The federal matching payment for the portion of the rate related to the July 1, 2009 base payment would be the regular Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) rate, except that this rate would be increased by one percent if the provisions of section 4106 of the Affordable Care Act are applicable.
Supplemental Links:
Effective for dates of service on and after January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014, states are required by law to reimburse qualified providers at the rate that would be paid for the service (if the service were covered) under Medicare. Most states and the District of Columbia will need to submit a Medicaid state plan amendment (SPA) to increase Medicaid rates up to this level. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has issued a state plan amendment (SPA) preprint for the purpose of expediting review and approval of the primary care payment increase.
For dates of service starting January 1, 2013 qualified providers are entitled to receive the higher payment in accordance with the approved Medicaid state plan amendment. States may not have attestation procedures or higher fee schedule rates in place on January 1, 2013. In that event, providers will likely continue to be reimbursed the 2012 rates for a limited period of time. Once attestation procedures are in place and providers are identified as eligible for higher payment, the state will make one or more supplemental payments to ensure that providers receive payment for the difference between the amount paid and the Medicare rate. Qualified providers should receive the total due to them under the provision in a timely manner.
A state may draw federal financial participation for the higher payments only after the SPA methodology is approved.
Supplemental Links:
The statute specifies that higher payment applies to primary care services delivered by a physician with a specialty designation of family medicine, general internal medicine, or pediatric medicine. The regulation specifies that specialists and subspecialists within those designations as recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) or the American Board of Physician Specialties (ABPS) also qualify for the enhanced payment. Under the regulation, "general internal medicine" encompasses internal medicine and all subspecialties recognized by the ABMS, ABPS and AOA. In order to be eligible for higher payment:
- Physicians must first self-attest to a covered specialty or subspecialty designation.
- As part of that attestation they must specify that they either are Board certified in an eligible specialty or subspecialty and/or that 60 percent of their Medicaid claims for the prior year were for the Evaluation and Management (E&M) codes specified in the regulation. It is quite possible that physicians could qualify on the basis of both Board certification and claims history.
Only physicians who can legitimately self-attest to a specialty designation of (general) internal medicine, family medicine or pediatric medicine or a subspecialty within those specialties recognized by the American Board of Physician Specialties (ABPS), American Osteopathic Association (AOA) or American Board of Physician Specialties (ABPS) qualify.
It is possible that a physician might maintain a particular qualifying Board certification but might actually practice in a different field. A physician who maintains one of the eligible certificates, but actually practices in a non-eligible specialty should not self-attest to eligibility for higher payment. Similarly, a physician Board certified in a non-eligible specialty (for example, surgery or dermatology) who practices within the community as, for example, a family practitioner could self-attest to a specialty designation of family medicine, internal medicine or pediatric medicine and a supporting 60 percent claims history. In either case, should the validity of that physician's self-attestation be reviewed by the state as part of the annual statistical sample, the physician's payments would be at risk if the agency finds that the attestation was not accurate.