Many Medicaid beneficiaries living with dementia and other conditions can have a heightened risk of wandering, or attempting to leave a setting (exit-seeking) unsafely. These behaviors are not necessarily constant or permanent.

CMS encourages the use of an SI outside the state agency, but states can consider themselves in that role if they can support that effort and if that decision is made with consultation and agreement from CMS. For more information about the role of the SI, see Section 1.7 in part 01 of MECT Medicaid Enterprise Certification Life Cycle.

Yes. While CMS envisions a discrete role for the System Integrator (SI) in each state, with specific focus on ensuring the integrity and interoperability of the Medicaid IT architecture and coherence of the various modules incorporated into the Medicaid system complex, it is permissible for an SI to provide modules as part of the overall solution.

State Medicaid agencies are required to have MMIS System Security Plan and Privacy Impact Assessment documents. State Medicaid agencies must perform regular routine security and privacy risk assessments to ensure the protection and safeguard of beneficiary data that is consistent with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy and security rules.

Yes, CMS will support the costs for this kind of MMIS transition. We encourage states to ensure that both the current vendor's and new solutions provider's contracts account for this transition period and address a prorating of cost during this time. States should minimize the costs of transition by performing due diligence on the anticipated spending. The legacy system provider should be compensated for its role in ensuring a smooth transition, with a ramp-down of other operational costs.

All the criteria in the checklists (MITA, MMIS or Custom) are the same. The difference between checklists is the criteria organization within the checklists. If the services solution is innovative, unique, or an unconventional approach, then the custom checklist approach might be appropriate. The RO will work with the state and vendors to decide which checklist set is best suited for the state's certification. Both service and traditional-type solutions need to meet all certification criteria to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

CMS encourages states to reuse modular solutions as much as possible. If a state can reuse a modular solution from another state with minimal changes or customization, CMS will work with the state to streamline the certification process as much as possible to leverage knowledge of the reused solution. However, CMS will still require a certification decision for each state implementation of reused solutions to ensure compliance with federal regulations.

To reduce potential conflict of interest, CMS is ensuring that states are arranging IV&V services through contracts that should be owned outside of the agency that owns the MMIS or E&E project. The oversight organization for the IV&V contractor should not be involved in oversight of the development effort, a stakeholder in the business implementation, or the DDI contractor. The IV&V contract monitor should be aware of system development problem solving, reporting, and contractor management.