Medicaid Program and CHIP; Mandatory Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Core Set Reporting
Final rule.
CFR Part: "42 CFR Parts 433, 437, and 457"
RIN Number: "RIN 0938-AU52"
Citation: "88 FR 60278"
Document Number: "CMS-2440-F"
Page Number: "60278"
"Rules and Regulations"
Agency: "
SUMMARY: This document establishes requirements for mandatory annual State reporting of the Core Set of Children's Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid and the
DATES:
Effective Date: These regulations are effective
Applicability Date: The initial round (2024) of Core Sets reporting must be submitted and certified by States by
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Quality Measurement in Medicaid and CHIP Medicaid was enacted in 1965 as Title XIX of the Social Security Act (the Act) to provide health coverage for certain groups of people with lower incomes. In 1997, upon enactment of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-33, enacted
FOOTNOTE
Given the significant role that Medicaid and CHIP play in America's health care system, this rule requires--for the first time--States, the
The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) (Pub. L. 111-3, enacted
Section 401 of CHIPRA added new section 1139A to the Act, which required development of a Core Set of Children's Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid and CHIP (Child Core Set), which could be voluntarily reported by States, and directed the Secretary to publish for general comment an initial recommended core set of child health quality measures based on existing quality of care measures for children not later than
FOOTNOTE 2 Initial Child Core Set: https://downloads.cms.gov/cmsgov/archived-downloads/SMDL/downloads/SHO11001.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Section 2701 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-148, enacted
FOOTNOTE 3 Initial Adult Core Set: https://www.medicaid.gov/sites/default/files/Federal-Policy-Guidance/Downloads/cib-01-04-12.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
This rule implements mandatory annual reporting of the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set using a standardized format, as required by section 50102 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-123, enacted
B. Quality Measurement of the Medicaid Health Home Benefits Under Sections 1945 and 1945A of the Act
In addition to requiring reporting on the Child Core Set and specified behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set, this rule establishes reporting requirements for States that elect to implement one or both of the optional Medicaid health home benefits under sections 1945 or 1945A of the Act. Section 1945 of the Act (added by section 2703 of the ACA and later amended by section 1006(a) of the SUPPORT Act) and section 1945A of the Act (added by section 3 of the
FOOTNOTE 4 Public Law 116-16, enacted
FOOTNOTE 5 On
FOOTNOTE 6 On
As a condition for receiving payment for section 1945 health home services, section 1945(g) of the Act requires section 1945 health home providers to report to the State, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary shall specify, on all applicable measures for determining the quality of health home services. Section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act also requires certain States with an approved substance use disorder (SUD)-focused section 1945 health home State plan amendment (SPA) to report information to the Secretary on certain topics, including on the quality of health care provided to SUD-eligible individuals receiving health home services under the SUD-focused health home SPA. /7/ Section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act further provides that the Secretary shall specify all applicable quality measures that would be included in the reporting required under that provision. Per section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act, States must submit the required report at the end of the period of such SPA. We have interpreted this language to mean that the report should provide data relating to the enhanced Federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) period available to the State under section 1945(c)(4) of the Act and that States should submit the report within 6 months after the enhanced FMAP period ends. /8/
FOOTNOTE 7
FOOTNOTE 8 Under section 1945(c)(1) of the Act, State payments for section 1945 health home services provided during the first 8 fiscal year quarters that a section 1945 SPA is in effect are Federally matched at a 90 percent Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP). Section 1006(a) of the SUPPORT Act, "Extension of Enhanced FMAP for
Apart from the one-time-only required report under section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act, section 1945 of the Act does not require States to submit quality measure reporting to CMS or the Secretary related to the section 1945 health home benefit. However, since 2013, we have encouraged States (including States subject to the one-time-only report specified at section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act) to report annually on a set of section 1945 health home quality measures (section 1945 Health Home Core Set). /9/ We published an initial core set of section 1945 health home quality measures in 2013, with updates issued annually. We also explained when publishing the initial core set of section 1945 health home quality measures that reporting on the section 1945 Health Home Core Set would be voluntary until regulations were promulgated to require it. However, to ease the reporting burden, all but one of the recommended measures was aligned with measures in the Adult Core Set. /10/ Subsequent updates to the section 1945 Health Home Core Set have been made on an annual basis. In developing and updating the section 1945 Health Home Core Set, we have generally tried to align it with the Child and Adult Core Sets. In
FOOTNOTE 9 SUD Health Home reporting CIB at https://www.medicaid.gov/Federal-policy-guidance/downloads/cib112719.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 10 Initial section 1945 Health Home Core Set: https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/smd-13-001.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 11 https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/cib112719.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act requires section 1945A health home providers to report information to the State on all applicable measures for determining the quality of health home services provided by the provider, including, to the extent applicable, child health quality measures and measures for centers of excellence for children with complex needs developed under Title XIX, Title XXI, and section 1139A of the Act (which would include the Child Core Set). Additionally, unlike section 1945 of the Act, which requires States to report on quality measures to the Secretary only if the State is subject to section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act, section 1945A of the Act requires all States implementing that benefit to submit reports to the Secretary on a range of topics. Under section 1945A(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, these reports must include all information reported by providers to the State under section 1945A(g)(1) of the Act, including the quality measure reporting required under section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act. We interpret the language in section 1945A(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act to refer to reporting on core measures developed for purposes of evaluating the quality of section 1945A health home services, because that provision cross-references the language in section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act that mentions quality measures developed under various provisions of the Act, including the Child Core Set.
This rule establishes the following requirements for States electing to implement the benefit under sections 1945 or 1945A of the Act. Under the provisions of this rule, States that have implemented the section 1945 and/or 1945A health home benefit must report annually on the mandatory measures in the section 1945 Health Home Core Set and/or a proposed section 1945A Health Home Core Set (depending on which of the two benefits the State has opted to cover) and must require their health home providers to report to the State on those measures. Annual CMS reporting guidance will provide information on specific measures for which reporting is mandatory for the section 1945 and section 1945A Health Home Core Sets (including any specific measures that would be mandatory for States with a SUD-focused section 1945 health home). For States covering the section 1945 health home benefit, this requirement is based on section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, which requires State Medicaid agencies to make such reports, in such form and containing such information, as the Secretary may from time to time require, and to comply with such provisions as the Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports. For measures specific to States with SUD-focused health home SPAs subject to section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act, this requirement is also authorized by the language in section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act stating that the Secretary shall specify all applicable measures for determining quality for purposes of section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act, but this rule does not otherwise address the reporting requirements under section 1945(c)(4)(B) of the Act. Requiring States to require their section 1945 health home providers to report to the State on the Health Home Core Set is further supported by the language in section 1945(g) of the Act providing that section 1945 health home providers shall report to States on all applicable measures for determining the quality of section 1945 health home services, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary shall specify. For States covering the section 1945A health home benefit, these requirements are authorized by section 1945A(g)(1) and (2) of the Act (see discussion of those provisions above), as well as by section 1902(a)(6) of the Act. While this rule implements section 1945A(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, section 1945A(g)(2)(A) of the Act requires States to report to the Secretary on several additional topics that are not addressed in this rule. CMS expects to provide information to States about the rest of the reporting requirements under section 1945A(g)(2)(A) of the Act in the future.
C. Building a System of Reporting To Improve the Quality of Care Delivered
Implementation of the Child and Adult Core Sets, and the sections 1945 and 1945A Health Home Core Sets, represents a major step in the development of a national, evidence-based system for measuring and improving the quality of care delivered to Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries. The Core Sets include measures that, taken together, may be used to estimate the overall national quality of health care provided to beneficiaries. The ability to assess the quality of and access to care furnished by State Medicaid and CHIP programs is critical given that more than 93 million Americans receive coverage in Medicaid and CHIP, and the annual expenditures for the programs are over
FOOTNOTE
1. Development of Core Sets
To ensure that the measures included in the Child and Adult Core Sets reflect the needs of Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries and provide the types of information necessary to assess the overall national quality of health care, sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act establish a number of specific parameters for the development of these core sets. For a complete and full description of these requirements see sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act.
The initial section 1945 Health Home Core Set was established in 2013 as a recommended set of health care quality measures for assessing the section 1945 health home service delivery model. We have updated the section 1945 Health Home Core Set annually since 2013, and in 2021 we established a Health Home Annual Review Workgroup to align this update process with the CMS process to annually update the Child and Adult Core Sets (as further discussed below).
We formed a joint Child and Adult Core Sets Annual Review Workgroup in 2019, consolidating what had previously been two separate workgroups, to implement the statutory requirements and to ensure that measures in the Core Sets are meaningful for States and interested parties and feasible for State-level reporting. /13/ In 2021, the Health Home Annual Review Workgroup was implemented, following the same structure and guidelines as the workgroup for the Child and Adult Core Sets, to develop and update section 1945 and section 1945A Health Home Core Sets. The joint Child and Adult Core Sets Annual Review Workgroup and the Health Home Annual Review Workgroup ("Workgroups") develop recommendations on how to revise, strengthen, and improve the applicable Core Sets measures, and every year the Workgroups' recommended changes are published for public comment and then submitted to CMS. All meetings are open to the public, and public comment is invited during each meeting.
FOOTNOTE 13 Annual Review and Selection Process: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/annual-core-set-review.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
D. Shifting From Voluntary to Mandatory Reporting
In 2018,
First, section 50102(b) of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-123, enacted
Second, section 5001 of the SUPPORT Act (Pub. L. 115-271, enacted
As discussed previously, this final rule also implements certain statutory requirements in sections 1902(a)(6), 1945, and 1945A of the Act to require States that have opted to implement the section 1945 or section 1945A health home benefit to report on the section 1945 or 1945A Core Sets, as applicable, and also to require their health home providers to report on the applicable health home core set.
II. Summary of the Proposed Provisions and Analysis of and Responses to the Public Comments
We received 93 public comments from individuals and organizations, including, but not limited to, State government agencies, non-profit health care organizations, advocacy groups, associations, law firms, managed care organizations, academic groups, tribal organizations, and private citizens. We thank the commenters for their consideration of the proposed requirements for mandatory reporting and appreciate the submission of all of the comments received. In general, commenters supported the proposed rule. In this section, arranged by subject area, we summarize the proposed provisions, the public comments received, and our responses. For a complete and full description of the proposed mandatory reporting requirements, see the 2022 proposed rule, "Medicaid Program and CHIP; Mandatory Medicaid and
A. Basis, Scope, Purpose and Applicability
As discussed in section II.A. of the proposed rule, we proposed in
In general, commenters who submitted public comments on the proposed general requirements for mandatory reporting supported the proposed scope, purpose, and process. We are finalizing those provisions in [Sec.]
Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed rule in its entirety or specifically indicated their support for reporting of a specific component such as the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set. Many of the comments referred to the positive outcomes that CMS expects from finalization of these proposals. The commenters generally expressed support for these proposals and noted that the proposed changes to the requirements for reporting the Core Sets will support the improvement of health outcomes for Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries overall in addition to addressing health disparities and inequities.
Response: We appreciate the support for our proposal and thank those who took the time to give us feedback.
Comment: Several commenters recommended the following revisions (indicated below in bold typeface) to the proposed
* Section 1139A(a)(8) of the Act to support the definition of the Child Core Set as a "group of valid, reliable, and evidence-based quality measures."
* Section 1139A(b) of the Act established the Pediatric Quality Measures program to advance the development of evidence-based quality measures for children which, per sections 1139A(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the Act, "shall, at a minimum, be . . . designed to identify and eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in child health and the provision of health care" and "ensure that the data required for such measures is collected and reported in a standard format that permits comparison of quality and data at a State, plan, and provider level."
* Section 1139A(a)(3)(D) of the Act to highlight health disparities and comparative analysis in its requirement that the initial Child Core Set "taken together, can be used to estimate the overall national quality of health care for children, including children with special needs, and to perform comparative analyses of pediatric health care quality and racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in child health and health care for children."
* Sections 1139B(a) and (b)(5) of the Act that direct the Secretary to develop the Adult Core Set "in the same manner" as the Child Core Set.
Response: We appreciate the suggestion to revise this section of the regulation and agree with the commenters on the importance of aligning quality measurement across multiple levels and measure sets, as feasibility and applicability allow. We consider measuring and reporting health disparities to be a cornerstone of CMS' approach to advancing health equity and improving quality as outlined in the proposed rule. The public comment recommending that the purpose of the Child and Adult Core Sets include "comparison of quality and data at a State, program, plan, and provider level" cites the statutory requirement as section 1139A(b)(2)(C) of the Act. That statutory requirement applies to measures developed under the pediatric quality measures program and does not refer to the reporting requirements for the Child Core Set, which are established in section 1139A(c) of the Act and require "Annual State Reports Regarding State-Specific Quality of Care Measures Applied Under Medicaid or Chip." Section 1139A(c) of the Act requires reporting of State-level Child Core Set data, and does not require program-, plan- or provider-level reporting. In addition, it does not necessarily require comparative analysis of such data. There is similar language in section 1139B(d) of the Act, which requires reporting of Adult Core Set data at the State-level. Given these considerations, we are finalizing
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS add a provision to the final rule to require CMS to collect, analyze, and make publicly available Child and Adult Core Sets data annually by
Response: The statutory authority for the Core Sets at sections 1139A(c)(2) and 1139B(d)(2) of the Act requires the Secretary to collect, analyze, and make publicly available, by
Comment: One commenter recommended that because most of the current Health Home Core Sets measures have continuous enrollment periods of "no gaps in coverage," "no more than 45-day gap in coverage," and "no more than 90-day gap in coverage," CMS should alter
Response: In an effort to include as many active health home programs as possible in quality measurement reporting, we believe it is preferable to maintain the minimum requirement as it was proposed, even if this means a health home program may lack sufficient data to report on certain measures, as what a health home program can report will still be useful to help us and the State to understand the quality of care provided in the health home program. Specifically, the requirement states that a health home program must report if it has been implemented for more than 6 months prior to the
Comment: A few commenters expressed support for the proposed changes but provided feedback on areas that were not addressed in the proposed rule. One commenter noted that it is critical that health plans reporting on Core Set quality measures have effective tools to communicate with enrollees in order to ensure that enrollees understand plan benefits and recommended health care screenings and services, and that these plans can also address barriers to higher quality care. This commenter requested that CMS issue guidance to States to help improve communication with beneficiaries due to confusion regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) (Pub. L. 102-243, enacted
Response: We thank the commenters for their support of the proposed requirements for mandatory reporting and appreciate the submission of these comments but note that these areas are outside of the scope of this rulemaking.
Comment: One commenter requested confirmation that States with section 1115 demonstrations are included in mandatory reporting.
Response: States are required to report mandatory Core Set measures for all required populations, even if those beneficiaries are enrolled in a section 1115 demonstration. States with section 1115 demonstrations are required under demonstration Special Terms and Conditions (STCs) to monitor their demonstration's performance. Section 1115 demonstration monitoring and reporting requirements are in addition to and not in lieu of requirements for State-level Core Set reporting as outlined in this final rule. As part of the demonstration monitoring process, we may require that States report a select set of Core Set measures that support assessing performance and progress toward specific goals and objectives of the demonstration. This reporting, which may be adapted for demonstration populations, is in addition to mandatory Core Set reporting. Additionally, States may leverage Core Set measures as part of their section 1115 demonstration evaluation.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS streamline the language in
Response: We believe the Congressional intent is for mandatory reporting to apply to the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures of the Adult Core Set, and not to apply to the remaining quality measures. For the Child and Adult Core Sets, this rulemaking is not proposing to make mandatory any measures beyond those under sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act. Therefore, we are maintaining the proposed scope of mandatory reporting and are not making any changes to
Comment: One commenter urged CMS to consider ways to help address any burden that new data collection efforts may cause for States by exploring funding opportunities to assist States in conducting the necessary activities to implement these important provisions effectively.
Response: We appreciate the submission of this comment but note that this issue is outside of the scope of this rulemaking. As noted in the proposed rule, in Medicaid, enhanced Federal Financial Participation (FFP) is available at 90 percent for the design, development, and installation (including of enhancements) of mechanized claims processing and information retrieval systems, and 75 percent enhanced FFP is available for operations of such systems, in accordance with applicable Federal requirements. /14/ Receipt of these enhanced Federal Medicaid matching rates is conditioned upon States meeting a series of standards and conditions. /15/ Additionally, under section 1903(a)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act, the FFP for State expenditures on systems development or modifications necessary for efficient collection and reporting on the Child Core Set is at the State's FMAP under section 1905(b) of the Act. We also note that under section 1903(a)(7) of the Act, Federal Medicaid matching funds may be available at a 50 percent Federal match rate for staffing and contracting related to implementing Core Set reporting requirements, as these activities might, subject to certain conditions, be necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the State plan. To the extent these system expenditures are attributable to a State's CHIP (Medicaid Expansion CHIP (MCHIP), or separate CHIP), cost-allocation methodologies set forth in 45 CFR part 75 apply. For the CHIP-funded portion of the expenditure, States can claim at a State's CHIP enhanced FMAP (eFMAP) available under section 2105(b) of the Act. We note that systems expenditures are administrative expenditures, and CHIP administrative funding is limited to 10 percent of either a State's total computable allotments for a FFY or its total expenditures reported for a FFY, whichever is lower. /16/
FOOTNOTE 14 See section 1903(a)(3)(A)(i) and (B) of the Act,
FOOTNOTE 15 42 CFR 433.112 and 42 CFR 433.116. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 16 See 42 CFR 457.618(e)(1). END FOOTNOTE
B. Definitions
As discussed in section II.B. of the proposed rule, in
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS revise (with revisions indicated in boldface type below) the definition of "behavioral health" proposed at
Response: We agree with the recommendation to add "and recovery," as recovery is a key part of improving the health outcomes for individuals with behavioral health conditions, and are revising the definition of behavioral health in
FOOTNOTE 17 CMS Behavioral Health Strategy: https://www.cms.gov/cms-behavioral-health-strategy. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Several commenters supported CMS' proposal to broadly define "behavioral health" and "behavioral health measures." Some commenters recommended additional guidance on the potential scope of conditions and quality measures included in the definition to ensure a shared understanding of such definitions and help prepare for reporting.
Response: We appreciate the support for the proposed "behavioral health" definition, which aligns with the behavioral health conditions included in the
FOOTNOTE 18 2022 Core Set CIB: https://www.medicaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/cib111522_0.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 19 2023-2024 Behavioral Health Core Set: https://www.medicaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2023-bh-core-set.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
C. The Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets
As discussed in section II.C. of the proposed rule, in
Commenters generally supported the process proposed in
Comment: Several commenters provided feedback on areas that were not addressed in the proposed rule such as: proposing specific changes to the Core Sets, proposing measure additions or removals, identifying measure gaps on the Core Sets, adding non-behavioral health measures to the list of Adult Core Set measures required in mandatory reporting, and measure development and testing. Specifically, a few commenters recommended a "duration of coverage" measure as called for by existing statute (section 1139A(a)(3)(A) of the Act) to assess the negative impact of churn on the quality of care that children receive and recommended that this measure be added to the Child Core Set no later than mandatory reporting for 2024.
Response: We appreciate the submission of these comments, and we will consider these comments as part of the measure adoption subregulatory process. We encourage the commenters to attend meetings of the joint Child and Adult Core Sets Annual Review Workgroup and the Health Home Annual Review Workgroup (Workgroups), which are convened annually to develop recommendations on how to revise, strengthen, and improve the applicable Core Sets measures. /20/ All meetings are open to the public, public comment is invited during each meeting, and every year the Workgroup recommendations are published for public comment. /21/
FOOTNOTE 20 https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/annual-core-set-review-11102022.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 21 https://www.mathematica.org/features/maccoresetreview. END FOOTNOTE
We agree with the commenters regarding the importance of understanding the continuity of coverage among Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries, recognizing that disruptions in coverage can lead to periods of uninsurance, delayed care, and reduced access to preventive care and other essential care for beneficiaries. Beneficiaries moving on and off Medicaid and CHIP coverage (sometimes called "churning") can lead to higher administrative costs, less predictable State expenditures, and higher monthly health care costs due to pent-up demand for health care services. To help address this issue, section 5112 of subtitle B of title V of division FF of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (CAA, 2023) (Pub. L. 117-328), which was signed into law
FOOTNOTE 22 https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/access-care/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter encouraged CMS to consider making the
Response: While we appreciate the submission of this comment, the issue of which specific measures will be voluntary versus mandatory will be considered in the subregulatory measure revision process described previously in this final rule. The NCIDD-AD measure is an experience of care survey that was added to the Adult Core Set to address a gap in measures for long-term services and supports. It has not been identified as a behavioral health measure and will not become mandatory for State reporting in 2024. Measure administration and technical specifications are set by the measure steward, the
Comment: One commenter encouraged CMS to work with States to ensure that contraceptive care measures are used appropriately in the Child Core Set without reference to an external benchmark that may suggest an appropriate level of contraceptive use, and without provider incentives that could promote forms of coercion.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of rulemaking. However, we appreciate this comment identifying potential issues related to the appropriate use and interpretation of the contraceptive care measure results. Specific to the Contraceptive Care measure, we note that we do not publish a benchmark for this measure, which examines provision of a most or moderately effective method of contraception and provision of a long-acting reversible method of contraception. The lack of benchmark reflects that some individuals will make informed decisions to choose methods in the lower tier of efficacy even when offered the full range of methods. /23/ To help ensure that data users understand that the goal is not prescribing contraceptives to 100 percent of women, we include language in public reporting (that is, the Child Core Set Chart Pack) /24/ indicating the estimated percentage in need of contraceptive services. Additionally, we cite resources from
FOOTNOTE 23 https://opa.hhs.gov/research-evaluation/title-x-services-research/contraceptive-care-measures. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 24 Annual Reporting on the Child Core Set: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/performance-measurement/adult-and-child-health-care-quality-measures/childrens-health-care-quality-measures/index.html#AnnualReporting. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 25 https://opa.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/interpreting-rates-for-contraceptive-care-measures.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS not use the Core Set data for State comparisons without accounting for State variation, including program and benefit design, geography and resources, and beneficiary characteristics.
Response: We appreciate the submission of these comments and will take this feedback into consideration when developing Core Set reporting guidance and materials for public reporting.
Comment: One commenter requested that the Secretary require managed care organizations (MCOs) to deliver stratified data in a timely manner to Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), facilities, and providers.
Response: While we appreciate the submission of this comment, this issue is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Comment: Several commenters provided recommendations on our publication of Core Set data, including that CMS limit phasing-in the publication of State-level data to no more than 3 years; that CMS publish all State-level data even if not enough States have reported for CMS to conduct comparative analysis and to report quartile rankings; that CMS reconsider its policy to limit public reporting of voluntary Core Set measures to measures that are reported by at least 25 States; and that CMS publish standardized core measures data with national benchmarks that would permit comparisons across States and over time.
Response: We will continue to publish Core Set data annually, as required under sections 1139A(c)(2) and 1139B(d)(2) of the Act for the Child Core Set and the Adult Core Set, respectively. We have worked to find a balance in the reporting of State data that meets these statutory reporting requirements while taking into consideration data quality and the ability to conduct comparative analysis. We appreciate the submission of these comments and will take them into consideration as we review State data as well as for future policymaking.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS seek to align the Core Set measures with other national reporting systems such as the Core Quality Measures Collaborative (CQMC) or the Medicaid and CHIP Quality Rating System (MAC QRS) in order to minimize additional reporting burden on providers and to ensure parsimony, alignment, harmonization, and the avoidance of competing quality measures. Other commenters noted that CMS should align with measures appropriate for State health care goals as defined by the
Response: We agree with the commenters on the importance of parsimony, alignment and harmonization in quality measurement and will consider these comments for subsequent rulemaking. Throughout the annual Core Set review process, we facilitate measure alignment through engagement with a variety of internal and external interested parties, Federal partners, other reporting systems related to Medicaid and CHIP, and Medicare and Marketplace quality programs, as well as through initiatives such as the
FOOTNOTE 26 https://www.cms.gov/files/document/2024-advance-notice-pdf.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Several commenters stated that that the proposed language requiring consideration of regulatory burden would hinder CMS' ability to add new measures to the Core Sets and to require States to report measures by specific populations or demographic characteristics. They recommended amending the proposed
Response: We agree with this comment that this language is open to interpretation and therefore accept the suggestion to revise
FOOTNOTE 27 CMS released both the 2023 and 2024 Child and Adult Core Sets in
FOOTNOTE 28 Proposed 1945A Health Home Core Set https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/2024-1945a-health-home-core-set.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS harmonize the Core Sets so that reporting is not duplicated across different programs, such that State reporting of the Child Core Set would mean that reporting would not be required again for the subset of children included in the health home. This commenter recommended that, for those children, only the additional health home-specific measures should need to be reported.
Response: While we aim to align measures across programs as much as possible, the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets data are reported at different levels. Specifically, the Child and Adult Core Sets data is reported to us at the State level, and Health Home Core Sets data is reported to us at the program level. For this reason, the same calculation cannot be used in both the Child Core Set or Adult Core Set and either of the Health Home Core Sets, as States have not submitted the data in their Child and Adult Core Sets reporting that would be necessary for us to derive health home program rates from State-level reporting. Regarding duplication of reporting, section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act requires section 1945A health home providers to report to the State information on all applicable measures for determining the quality of health home services provided by that health home provider, including to the extent applicable, child health quality measures and measures for centers of excellence for children with complex needs developed under section 1139A of the Act. Per section 1945A(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, the State then reports this information to us.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS remove measures which do not have
Response: We appreciate the submission of this comment, and it will be considered in the subregulatory measure identification process. However, we note that statute (sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act) does not limit the Child and Adult Core Sets to measures with NQF endorsement and, as required under the statute (sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act) for Child and Adult Core Sets, measures are selected through the Annual Core Set Workgroup process established by CMS. Health Home Core Sets are also selected through the Annual Core Set Workgroup process established by CMS, even though this process is not statutorily required for these core sets.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS review the list of individuals who participate in the Annual Core Set Workgroup to ensure meaningful representation from beneficiaries of all ages and their advocates, including people with disabilities and behavioral health disorders (including substance use disorders). Several commenters requested that the Workgroup have representation of specific types of organizations and individuals, including but not limited to: beneficiaries, MCOs, purchasers of health care, providers and consumers and/or national organizations that represent adults, FQHCs, pharmacies and pharmacists, providers and health care professionals, and beneficiaries served through a Health Home (this would apply only to the Health Home Core Sets).
Response: We appreciate the submission of these comments and will take them into consideration as we organize future Workgroups. All Workgroup meetings are open to the public, and public comment is invited during each meeting.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS monitor the Workgroup process to determine if interested parties' feedback is being adequately addressed or if a formal rulemaking process is necessary.
Response: We appreciate the submission of this comment and will take it into consideration as we organize future Workgroups and monitor the public comment process.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS offer States and health care organizations financial assistance to develop and deploy health equity efforts, including funding support in addressing the capture of self-reported data. Another commenter recommended that CMS require States to submit plans for mitigating persistent disparities and regularly report on their progress to close access and quality gaps.
Response: While we appreciate these comments, they are outside the scope of this rulemaking, which addresses only Core Sets data and measurement. However, we note that Medicaid and CHIP Federal matching funds are available for State expenditures on the design, development, and installation (including of enhancements), and for operation, of mechanized claims processing and information retrieval systems. This could include State expenditures related to operating such systems for Core Sets reporting. We also note that under section 1903(a)(7) of the Act, Federal matching funds are available for activities necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the Medicaid State plan. This may include improving data reporting, which could promote greater health equity.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS examine and prioritize the selection of Child Core Set measures that can provide actionable data at the level of providers to continue to improve pediatric outcomes and focus on health disparities and measures that can provide the most value in terms of informing the quality of pediatric care.
Response: While we appreciate this comment, provider-level data is outside the scope of the rulemaking, which addresses reporting at the State and health home program level. We note also that the statutory mission of the Child Core Set, as stated in section 1139A(3)(D) of the Act, specifies "the types of measures that, taken together, can be used to estimate the overall national quality of health care for children, including children with special needs, and to perform comparative analyses of pediatric health care quality and racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in child health and health care for children."
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS improve the measure sets' relevance to children with special health care needs and children with medically complex conditions included in sections 1945 and 1945A health home programs.
Response: We agree with the importance of reflecting all populations that are served in both section 1945 and 1945A health home programs in the Health Home Core Sets. The specific measures to be included in the Health Home Core Sets, which are determined through the workgroup process finalized in
1. Annual Reporting Guidance
As discussed in section II.C.1. of the proposed rule, we proposed in [Sec.]
In general, commenters supported the proposed annual reporting process, but requested clarification on what would be included in the reporting guidance. We are finalizing these provisions with revisions to [Sec.]
Comment: Commenters noted that there are many details related to the contents of reporting guidance that were not addressed by the regulatory text. In particular, they asked for additional guidance as to: (1) whether CMS would continue to arrange licensing agreements with measure stewards related to the use and reporting of Core Set measures; (2) how CMS would identify the mandatory measures, populations to be included in mandatory reporting, and the process for reporting; (3) the timeline for reporting new measures; and (4) attribution rules for beneficiaries enrolled in different coverage during the reporting period and how to operationalize them.
Response: To address concerns raised by these commenters, through revisions to [Sec.]
FOOTNOTE 29 Reporting guidance will be posted here: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/quality-of-care-performance-measurement/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Multiple commenters recommended that, as future modifications or additions are made to the Core Set, CMS issue reporting guidance as soon as possible to give States, MCOs, and health care providers time to prepare for reporting. Some commenters recommended that CMS release reporting guidance in alignment with the
Response: We will take this feedback into consideration when developing Core Set reporting guidance and materials for public reporting. Measure stewards release updated guidance throughout the calendar year. Due to the need to adapt the reporting guidance developed by individual measure stewards, such as
Comment: Multiple commenters recommended that CMS consult MCOs and/or behavioral health organizations (BHOs) as CMS develops annual reporting guidance for States in order to promote awareness of these resources, as many States rely on MCOs to provide data for reporting on the Core Sets and will need to update their reporting systems to implement standardized reporting. Another commenter recommended that CMS clarify the role of MCOs in supporting providers and State agencies in their efforts to improve Medicaid and CHIP quality measurement.
Response: As part of our annual process to update reporting guidance, we review all of the technical assistance requests received related to specific measures, which often include questions submitted by MCOs/BHOs that are working on behalf of States to calculate Core Sets measures. The publication of reporting guidance and any updates regarding the Core Sets, including the publication of Core Set data products, is disseminated through a public listserv. /30/ We defer to each individual State's Medicaid and CHIP agencies to determine the role MCOs and BHOs will have in in their State's Core Sets reporting and efforts to improve quality measurement within their State.
FOOTNOTE 30 To join the Core Set listserv email: [email protected]. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter agreed with reporting data for partial-year enrollees at the State level, but recommended against attributing these data to specific MCOs if CMS stratifies reporting by health plan, noting that MCOs would have limited opportunity to work with members to accomplish necessary screenings and visits.
Response: Decisions regarding the continuous enrollment period and allowable gaps are established by the measure stewards for each measure. Core Set reporting applies to all beneficiaries who meet enrollment criteria in State Medicaid and/or CHIP programs. We will take this comment regarding health plan attribution into consideration as we develop reporting guidance regarding attribution and stratification categories.
2. Advancing Health Equity Through Data Stratification
Measuring and reporting on health disparities is a cornerstone of CMS' approach to advancing health equity. As discussed in section II.C.2. of the proposed rule, we proposed in
FOOTNOTE 31 Executive Order 13985: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/. END FOOTNOTE
We believe that this stratification of data in the Child Core Set, Adult Core Set, and Health Home Core Sets measures is consistent with our statutory authorities. Regarding the Child Core Set, section 1139A(b)(2)(B) of the Act specifies that measures under the pediatric quality measures program shall be "designed to identify and eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in child health and the provision of health care." In addition, section 1139A(a)(3)(D) of the Act required that the initial Child Core Set contain the "types of measures that, taken together, can be used to estimate the overall national quality of health care for children, including children with special needs, and to perform comparative analyses of pediatric health care quality and racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in child health and health care for children." Regarding the Adult Core Set, section 1139B(a) of the Act requires the Secretary to utilize similar parameters for establishing the Adult Core Set. Additionally, section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, which requires State Medicaid agencies to make such reports, in such form and containing such information, as the Secretary may from time to time require, authorizes us to require stratification of the data that States report to us. Regarding the Health Home Core Sets, in addition to the authority provided by section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, section 1945(g) of the Act requires section 1945 health home services providers to report to the State, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary shall specify, on all applicable measures for determining the quality of such services. Section 1945A(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act requires States implementing the section 1945A health home benefit to submit to the Secretary, in such form and manner determined by the Secretary to be "reasonable and minimally burdensome," all section 1945A quality reporting data that was submitted to them under section 1945A(g)(1) of the Act. The information providers report to the State under section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act includes, to the extent applicable, child health quality measures developed under section 1139A of the Act.
We received public comments on the proposed approach to stratification of Core Set data, and in general, commenters supported the proposed process. We are finalizing these provisions generally as proposed in
Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed requirement to phase in stratified reporting over a period of 5 years and recommended that the Secretary specify which measures must be stratified in order to promote consistency and comparability across States rather than allowing States to decide the measures and factors for which they will submit stratified data each year. A few commenters recommended instead that States be able to choose based on data availability or State health care priorities. Multiple commenters also supported the proposed requirements that States stratify certain measures by demographics, health care delivery systems, and other characteristics to enable better care comparisons and identification of health disparities. Some commenters recommended that CMS ensure that stratified data be reported for both managed care and FFS delivery systems. Several commenters supported the improved and expanded collection of data, and analysis of quality measures by population (such as dually eligible individuals), stratification categories (such as race and ethnicity or disability status), and delivery systems and provider types. They noted that these activities would allow for the deployment of strategies that better account for the needs of beneficiaries and further understanding of barriers to care and health disparities. One commenter also recommended that CMS make available reporting guidance, information on potential or expected data sources, and share examples of State data collection, organization, and lessons learned.
Response: We worked to find a balance in the reporting of State data that meets the statutory reporting requirements under sections 1139A(c)(2) and 1139B(d)(2) of the Act while taking into consideration data quality and the ability to conduct comparative analysis, and we determined that allowing States to choose which measures to stratify based on data availability or State health care priorities would limit our ability to publish standardized core measure data that could be compared across States and over time. Therefore, in the methodology we are finalizing in
FOOTNOTE 32 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter stated that the Core Sets were initially developed as a within-State quality improvement tool. Because State Medicaid programs vary greatly in eligibility and offerings, it is important that proposed stratifications do not lead to State-to-State comparison without consideration for the populations served. The commenter also stated that stratifications would add to State reporting burden while not adding additional value or information for improvement, and recommended stratification be piloted first to determine if it is needed.
Response: The Child Core Set was intended not only to provide States with a tool to drive improvement for their enrollees but also to provide an estimate of the overall national quality of health care for children (section 1139A(a)(5) of the Act). As discussed previously in this final rule, we believe that stratification of data in the Child Core Set, Adult Core Set, and Health Home Core Sets measures is consistent with our statutory authorities. Stratified Core Set quality measure data will enable CMS and States to identify the health outcomes of underserved populations as well as potential differences in health outcomes between populations. Stratified data can also inform adoption of broadly applicable quality improvement initiatives that address the drivers of health disparities experienced by underserved populations. Due to the variability across States in the populations served by Medicaid and CHIP, and the different populations and health care services included in each core measure, a pilot project using a subset of States and/or measures would not provide sufficient data or results that could be generalized to provide an understanding of differences in health outcomes overall.
Comment: Several commenters submitted recommendations and requests related to the details of stratified reporting, such as definitions of specific categories, data suppression policies and how to handle missing data, and different measures of delivery systems.
Response: We will take these comments into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance. We are finalizing the list of stratification factors in
Comment: Several commenters recommended that consistent data standards for stratification of race, ethnicity, and language, across programs and agencies would clarify and facilitate data collection. However, one commenter noted that new standards should not inhibit the ability of States to tailor their data fields to reflect their populations as long as they are able to be aggregated to Federal categories and that any guidance provided by CMS in this area should also recognize the experiences of people with multiple racial and/or ethnic identities. Additionally, several commenters suggested that CMS include a "Middle Eastern or North African" response among the race and ethnicity measures, allowing for stratified health outcomes for a population that experiences disparities.
Response: The specific response categories included in stratified reporting will be addressed as part of the reporting guidance process that is discussed in the rule. We will take these recommendations into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance, considering data availability, data quality, and burden to States. We expect to align with
FOOTNOTE 33 The categories for HHS data standards for race and ethnicity are based on the disaggregation of the OMB standard: https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=53. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended that unknown, missing, or nonresponses on demographic variables be its own stratification category with its own associated measure rate. Another commenter recommended that CMS provide technical assistance to States on how to collect and report race and ethnicity information, including how States should handle large percentages of data records with "unknown" race and ethnicity. Several commenters recommended that an optional category for "declined to answer" or similar category be included in State reporting. A few commenters recommended a methodology for identifying beneficiaries with a disability based on disability questions from the
Response: We will take this feedback into consideration when developing Core Set reporting guidance on stratification requirements. This area of data collection and reporting is evolving rapidly, and we expect to provide additional technical assistance and support in this space in the future.
Comment: Several commenters supported all the proposed requirements for stratification but recommended either faster or slower implementation. Some commenters suggested that States be required to report stratified data by the 2024 reporting period rather than phase in this requirement. Another commenter noted that a shorter phase-in period would not be overly burdensome to States given the enhanced Federal Medicaid match for upgrading computer systems for this kind of reporting. Multiple commenters provided alternate phase-in schedules for stratification of Core Set measures.
Response: We agree on the importance of reporting stratified data to help identify and eliminate health disparities across populations. Reporting of stratified data is a cornerstone of our approach to advancing health equity, as outlined in the proposed rule. We determined that a shorter phase-in period, such as between 1 and 4 years, would not likely be operationally feasible because of the potential systems and contracting changes (to existing contracts or the establishment of new contracts) that States may be required to make in order to collect these data. For example, additional reporting requirements may need to be added to State contracts, changes may be needed to data sharing agreements with MCOs, and modifications of databases or systems might be required to record new variables. Based on discussions with States regarding the feasibility of reporting stratified data, and the comments received supporting the proposed timeframe, we have addressed the comments recommending a longer duration of phase-in by revising
FOOTNOTE 34 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS modify the stratification schedule to consider a phased-in approach based on the stratification factor, for example, race, instead of the number of measures.
Response: We appreciate this feedback and will consider it when developing annual reporting guidance. Specific factors by which data will by stratified will be delineated in annual reporting guidance, and we will select these factors based on relevance and feasibility with the plan to add over time as the quality and completeness of data improve. We are finalizing
Comment: Multiple commenters recommended strategies for determining which measures should be stratified first and by which stratification factor(s) (that is, separate factors or multiple factors simultaneously). These strategies included working collaboratively with States and State-contracted entities, aligning with the measures and timeline for stratification as determined by NCQA Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) for their measures, beginning the phase-in with measures that are currently stratified for NCQA HEDIS reporting, and giving States the flexibility to decide the measures and factors for which they will submit stratified data each year. Several commenters recommended that CMS prioritize how measure stratification is phased in based on the topics of most urgent need, such as maternal and behavioral health, or measures addressing disease prevention. Some commenters encouraged stratification of the Core Set measures based on data obtained from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey, while others encouraged CMS not to require stratified CAHPS data. Some commenters encouraged CMS to ensure buy-in from interested parties such as States, beneficiary groups, and providers on measures selected for stratification so that States have adequate time to ensure that they are reporting high quality data.
Response: We will take these ideas into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance, and plan to work collaboratively with States to provide the technical assistance and reporting guidance necessary to support reporting of stratified data. /35/ We are finalizing as proposed the phase-in process for reporting stratified Core Set measures in
FOOTNOTE 35 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: We received many comments making recommendations on stratification factors for State reporting of Core Sets in
* Addition of sexual orientation and gender identity; socio-demographic data; pregnancy status; and socioeconomic status;
* Addition of the State's Medicaid expansion status with respect to coverage of adults under age 65 who are described in 42 CFR 435.119, as well as extended coverage during the 12-month postpartum period under section 1902(e)(16) and 2107(e)(1)(J) of the Act; and
* Recommendations both for and against addition of health care delivery system as a stratification factor. Many commenters noted that stratification by health plan could identify trends in quality, advance State alternative payment methodologies, and support oversight. One commenter noted that stratification by health plan would be especially helpful in comparing plans that are engaged in quality improvement projects to those that are not. Other commenters suggested that it may be helpful for certain measures to be stratified on a multi-level basis, for example, health plan data disaggregated by race, ethnicity, and other factors. Another commenter suggested that stratification by delivery system be used for quality improvement efforts only, and public reporting occur at the State level. A few commenters recommended that CMS not require stratification by health plan given the regional and population differences served by Medicaid managed care in States unless CMS can account for variation in geography, population, and benefits.
Response: We will take these comments into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance, which will include stratification factors. We are finalizing
Comment: Many commenters discussed both the positives and negatives of CMS potentially using geolocation or other types of data to impute identification of race and ethnicity. Several commenters recommended that CMS not use imputed data to calculate race and ethnicity data, and instead focus efforts on improving the collection and completeness of self-reported race and ethnicity data, and minimizing the burden of data collection and reporting, particularly on consumers. Multiple commenters recommended that CMS use imputed data sparingly, with some suggesting that CMS share any imputed data with States for review prior to publication, or not publicly report the results of stratification based on imputed data given the lack of validity of such data. Commenters noted it is critical that CMS provide details on what specific imputation methods would be used to stratify the Medicaid data, as many methods have been developed based on Medicare data and may not yield as accurate results in the Medicaid population. Additionally, one commenter recommended use of standardized imputation methods across the industry.
Response: We agree that self-reported beneficiary data should be used whenever possible, and that it is important to undertake efforts to improve data quality. To that end, in our efforts to improve the quality of race and ethnicity data, we have: issued guidance on reporting race and ethnicity in Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS); /36/ provided State technical assistance on identifying and investigating data quality issues based on unspecified, unknown, missing or invalid race and ethnicity data and worked with States to improve data quality and completeness; and published data quality assessments in the Medicaid Data Quality (DQ) Atlas. Complete demographic information from beneficiaries is the optimal source of data for stratification, and our development of imputation models is intended to complement this source with a reliable method to identify disparities in the face of missing or inaccurate data. /37/ We will release detailed documentation about the methodology used to develop imputations prior to the release of these data. We will take these suggestions into consideration and will consult with States on the use of imputed race and ethnicity when developing annual reporting guidance, technical assistance, and other resources for States.
FOOTNOTE 36 https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/data-and-systems/macbis/tmsis/tmsis-blog/109701. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 37 Elliott, Marc N., et al. "Using the
Comment: We received several comments about other sources of demographic data. Several commenters recommended that CMS use demographic data collected on the Medicaid and CHIP eligibility application and provide guidance that covers the entire process of data collection, reporting, and sharing. In reference to self-reported data, one commenter suggested CMS ensure that consumers are aware of the reasons why the data are being collected, that the process is voluntary, that no adverse action will result for failing to provide the data (that is, no loss of health benefits or access to services), and of how the data may be used, shared, and disclosed. Multiple commenters recommended that the CMS Single, Streamlined Online Application be revised to allow beneficiaries to select a "decline to answer" option in response to demographic questions. Other commenters suggested using State administrative data to supplement missing demographic information, and the use of electronic data in general, and recommended that CMS provide technical assistance on how to report measures for individuals with "unknown" race/ethnicity. One commenter suggested providing detailed measure information, such as indicating the data source or imputation methodology for demographic and performance data.
Response: Modifications to the Single Streamlined Application and State eligibility forms are outside the scope of this rulemaking; however, we will take the suggestions into consideration when making updates to the Single Streamlined Application. The Single Streamlined Application follows the OMB data standards for collection of race and ethnicity data, and use of this application is optional for States. /38/ When developing their own applications, States are encouraged to use the same standards and must ensure that questions asking about race and ethnicity are optional. The Single Streamlined Application eligibility application available through HealthCare.gov includes the following language alongside questions about race and ethnicity: "Selecting this person's race and ethnicity helps the
FOOTNOTE 38 The categories for HHS data standards for race and ethnicity are based on the disaggregation of the OMB standard: https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=53. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 39 Health Insurance Marketplace Application Instructions: https://www.healthcare.gov/downloads/marketplace-application-for-family-instructions.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 40 States could adopt this or similar language in their application, regardless of the modality (paper, online, phone). END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS acknowledge that States with smaller and/or more homogeneous populations may not be able to report data for a sufficient number of individuals for some stratification categories, such that CMS will need to suppress data to ensure privacy protections.
Response: We agree with the need to protect beneficiary privacy. We noted in the proposed rule that we will follow data suppression policies for measure stewards in addition to the CMS Cell Size Suppression Policy such that if sample sizes are too small, data will not be publicly reported to avoid a potential violation of privacy. We are finalizing
FOOTNOTE 41 CMS Cell Suppression Policy: https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/document/cms-cell-suppression-policy. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended establishing minimum denominators to identify statistically significant changes in disparities.
Response: We will take this comment into consideration for future guidance regarding health disparity analysis.
Comment: Some commenters suggested methods for CMS to align with other measure sets and organizations. Several commenters requested that CMS align with NCQA HEDIS as much as possible, including stratification categories and age ranges, and that other stratification factors be phased in after race and ethnicity. One commenter recommended that CMS explore using data submitted to
Response: We will take these ideas into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance. We agree with the commenters on the importance of parsimony, alignment, and harmonization in quality measurement to the extent possible. Throughout the annual Core Set review process, we actively engage with a variety of internal and external interested parties, Federal partners, other reporting agencies related to Medicaid and CHIP, and Medicare and Marketplace. This process facilitates measure alignment as appropriate, noting areas of needed divergence due to differences in reporting levels.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS work with other Federal agencies on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) application programming interfaces (API) standards, stating that aligning with FHIR standards would resolve many of the challenges in accessing both administrative and clinical data required to report Core Set measures, including demographic data required for stratification. These commenters encouraged CMS to explore ways to leverage the current interoperability and information sharing regulations to promote data sharing across systems and minimize the reporting burden on consumers. One commenter recommended that CMS undertake an assessment of the barriers and opportunities to enable data exchange and information systems interoperability in order to help report outcomes-based measures. Another commenter noted that simply relying on Electronic Health Record (EHR) vendors to implement FHIR and United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) standards will not be enough to ensure complete and accurate data. One commenter noted challenges with sharing data across systems with different EHRs. Several commenters expressed concern about data entry errors creating an increased State burden and recommended that CMS consider technical interventions such as open-source tools or use of structured electronic data files, standardized spreadsheets, API or other upload options to reduce burden and errors created through manual data entry.
Response: We will take these comments into consideration when developing annual reporting guidance, technical assistance, and other resources for States.
D. Annual Reporting on the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets
As discussed in section II.D. of the proposed rule, we proposed in [Sec.]
We received public comments on the process proposed in [Sec.]
Comment: Several commenters recommended that CMS allow States the option to self-report; or allow other alternate data sources such as Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) Analytic Files (TAF) to be used to calculate measures on States' behalf. However, these and other commenters requested additional information on the use of T-MSIS/TAF and noted that alternate data sources should be used only under certain conditions, namely: that States are allowed to opt-out; that States are provided the opportunity to review and confirm results; and that the calculation methodology adheres to the measure specifications including use of denied claims, among other stipulations. One commenter also requested that CMS provide States with assistance in investigating data discrepancies or measurements that seem to be in error.
Response: We will continue to assess whether T-MSIS/TAF or other alternate data sources can be used to calculate Core Set measures on behalf of States. As stated in
Comment: Several commenters raised concerns with the use of T-MSIS/TAF data to calculate Core Set data or for stratification, as there may be issues with the data validity for many States, and recommended that CMS not use T-MSIS for reporting on behalf of States. For example, some measures may require more years of data than are available through T-MSIS, or data reported through T-MSIS may be incomplete.
Response: We assess each Core Set measure individually to determine if it is able to be calculated using T-MSIS/TAF data, based on the technical specifications, considering the years of data available in T-MSIS and also the types of data required to accurately calculate that measure. As stated previously in this final rule preamble, we also intend to allow States to preview all Core Set data generated by T-MSIS.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS develop a third-party validation process that certifies State measure logic and audits Information Technology (IT)/measurement systems in a standardized way. This commenter also suggested validating supplemental data from the source, providing the example of
Response: We agree with the commenter on the importance of data quality in Core Set reporting. We have built a pre-publication quality assurance process into the review of all Core Sets data. Through this process, we work with States to resolve data quality issues and confirm any deviations from the reporting guidance. Sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act require the Secretary to collect, analyze, and make publicly available the information reported by States; however, these sections do not require the levels of data validation recommended by these commenters. While sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g) of the Act give the Secretary the authority to establish requirements related to the form and manner of health home quality reporting, they do not specify that the Secretary must require data validation of submissions. We will continue to evaluate data validation needs in developing resources for Core Set reporting.
Comment: One commenter recommended that CMS maximize the use of performance data that can be collected and transmitted electronically, and to minimize manual data collection. We understand the commenter to be recommending that the measures on the Core Sets primarily be those that can be calculated using only administrative or EHR data versus those that require manual chart reviews or in-person surveys.
Response: We appreciate the submission of these comments and will take this feedback into consideration in the subregulatory measure review process.
Comment: One commenter noted that if
Response: This final rule implements statutory reporting requirements for providers of section 1945 and section 1945A health home services at sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act. Providers of section 1945 health home services are required to meet the reporting requirements specified at section 1945(g) of the Act, and providers of section 1945A health home services are required to meet reporting requirements specified at section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act. If a Health Home provider is submitting data into a State-based system that the State is then using to calculate and report the Health Home Core Sets measures to us, those data submissions from the provider to the State would satisfy the statutory requirements under sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act. Comprehensive care management services are not a set protocol but rather one of the six services included in both the section 1945 and section 1945A Health Home benefits, as specified at sections 1945(h)(4)(B)(i) and 1945A(i)(4)(B)(i) of the Act. We have provided additional information about how we interpret this component of the section 1945 benefit in frequently asked questions (FAQs). /42/ Health Home quality measure reporting has always been mandatory for participating providers under both sections 1945 and 1945A of the Act (even if using CMS' recommended measures has not been mandatory), and health home providers will need to coordinate with the
FOOTNOTE 42 Health Home FAQs (
FOOTNOTE 43 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended allowing a minimum of 18 months to develop, test, and deploy new reporting requirements from a health IT standpoint once a State provides technical specifications to developers. Another commenter proposed that CMS consider that whenever multiple mandatory hybrid and survey measures are introduced in 1 year, staffing constraints, contractual agreements, procurement cycles, and similar issues may have an impact on States' abilities to gather data and calculate rates.
Response: We will take these comments into consideration when determining additions to the Core Sets for mandatory reporting.
Comment: One commenter requested that we explain whether the reporting requirements would increase the reporting burden on States and would not increase the burden on
Response: We will provide States with technical assistance /44/ related to Core Set reporting and will encourage States to work with Tribes and Tribal Organizations to improve data sharing. We recognize that States and Tribes establish individual contractual agreements that might affect the availability of Tribal data for Core Sets reporting. Given the different responsibilities for reporting that States and health care providers (such as those operated by IHS, Tribes, and Tribal Organizations) will have and the differences in resources available to them, it is hard to gauge for whom the burden of reporting will be greater or lesser. States should undertake Tribal Consultation related to reporting of Core Set measures, and are encouraged to coordinate with IHS, Tribes, and Tribal Organizations, to support data sharing.
FOOTNOTE 44 About the Medicaid and CHIP Core Set Technical Assistance and Analytic Support Program: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter noted a need for technical assistance incorporating States' Immunization Registry into their data warehouse, with tasks such as mapping individuals from the registry against Medicaid members and identifying the percent match rate. This commenter also stated that their State may need assistance with including CHIP enrollees' birth and mortality records from the State's Vital Statistics Office into their Medicaid and CHIP data warehouse.
Response: We will take this feedback into consideration when developing technical assistance resources and reporting guidance for Core Set reporting.
Comment: Multiple commenters recommended that CMS continue to offer technical assistance using a variety of formats including written guidance, standard templates, FAQs, measure specification and coding assistance, sharing of best practices, one-on-one State-specific technical assistance, learning collaboratives, direct communication with the technical assistance contractor, and instructional webinars that allow for questions. Commenters noted these have been effective mechanisms and will be needed in the future to meet mandatory reporting requirements. One commenter recommended templates and examples as part of technical assistance, while another recommended further clarification, structuring, and additional details in the reporting guidance to help streamline reporting and reduce error, but also to help States conduct quality assurance for their results. Additionally, several commenters requested technical assistance on data sharing with Federal and commercial partners, data stratification requirements, and how to address data limitations such as small sample sizes.
Response: We thank the commenters for their feedback on technical assistance methods and needs. We will provide technical assistance and will consider the suggestions when developing future technical assistance resources.
1. Adherence to Reporting Guidance
As discussed in section II.D.1. of the proposed rule, we proposed in
In general, commenters supported these proposals, and we are not making any changes to them in response to these comments. Below is a summary of the public comments we received regarding specific components of these proposals and our responses.
Comment: Multiple commenters concurred with CMS requiring States to adhere to the annual reporting guidelines to enable comparisons across States on quality performance and to calculate national performance rates for quality of care. Other commenters noted that standardized reporting should be the minimum requirement, and expectations for reporting should increase over time.
Response: We agree that requiring States to adhere to the reporting guidance, which we are finalizing in
Comment: Multiple commenters expressed concerns regarding strict adherence to reporting guidance as some deviations are the result of underlying differences in how State Medicaid programs or their data systems are structured. For example, some States limit the number of diagnosis codes that MCOs can submit, which may result in an eligible beneficiary being excluded from, for example, a diabetes measure if diabetes was not one of the highest diagnosis codes submitted for a visit in which multiple conditions were addressed. Another commenter requested that allowances be made for States to use the most reliable data source available, stating for example, the use of birth/vital records data vs. claims data for pregnancy/birth-related measures provides more specific information than can be found in claims data alone. One commenter proposed that if adherence is required, States should be permitted to explain any underlying systems differences that result in un-representative rates, and CMS should include this information with public reporting.
Response: Adherence to the reporting guidance is essential to provide effective comparisons across States on standardized quality measure performance and to derive national performance rates for the care provided to Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries. As such, we are finalizing
Comment: Several commenters requested that reporting guidance address the level of data completeness required to ensure that the stratified rate would be considered valid. Another commenter recommended that technical assistance be focused first on improving data quality.
Response: We will take these ideas into consideration when developing technical assistance resources and reporting guidance for Core Set reporting.
Comment: Several commenters requested that CMS reporting guidance for the Core Sets be identical to the measure developers' specifications to allow organizations to report measures used in multiple programs consistently. Several commenters made this recommendation specifically due to the burden associated with reporting measures that deviate from NCQA HEDIS specifications, while others also recommended this approach specifically if deviation from CMS guidance is no longer permitted. One commenter also recommended that CMS continue allowing States to report using audited MCO NCQA HEDIS rates.
Response: We will consider these comments when developing reporting guidance. Core Set reporting is State-level or health home program-level reporting, while NCQA HEDIS is plan-level reporting, and therefore, measure adaptations are necessary for us to provide guidance to States for State- or Health Home program-level reporting. In making measure adaptations, we work closely with measure stewards, including
Comment: One commenter encouraged CMS to be mindful of implementation timelines, which may overlap with States' work related to the restoration of eligibility and enrollment operations, including terminations of enrollment, following the end of the continuous enrollment condition under section 6008(b)(3) of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, as amended by the CAA, 2023, a process referred to as "unwinding."
Response: The timeline for mandatory reporting was statutorily established in 2018 to implement mandatory annual reporting of the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set, and these statutes do not include any provisions allowing us to modify the implementation timeline. We interpret the language in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the SUPPORT Act to mandate annual reporting of these Core Sets beginning with the annual State report on FFY 2024 and align with State reporting of the 2024 Core Sets, currently projected to occur in Fall 2024. However, consistent with
2. Reporting of Mandatory Measures
As discussed in section II.D.2. of the proposed rule, we proposed a methodology to phase in reporting of certain measures, including those that may be complex or difficult to report, those that are newly added to the Core Sets, or those that had significant updates to technical specifications from the prior year. We also asked for comment on how best to phase in reporting, the optimal frequency for reporting of outcome and survey-based measures, technical assistance States may need, and promising practices and approaches for data collection and data linkages.
We received comments stating that the Secretary does not have the statutory authority to delay the reporting of selected measures for any of the Core Sets, in addition to many comments supporting the proposed phased-in reporting process for mandatory measures. Upon additional review, we have determined that all of the measures currently on the Child Core Set and all of the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set should be subject to mandatory reporting in 2024. The majority of the measures proposed for the initial mandatory measure set for these Core Sets can be calculated using administrative data and have been on these Core Sets for many years, specifically, a median of 7 years for the Child Core Set and 10 years for the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set. Based on this analysis, and the fact that we have already released the list of measures included in the 2024 Child and Adult Core Sets, /45/ allowing States significant time to prepare to report on these measures, we believe that all measures on the 2024 Child Core Set and all behavioral health measures on the 2024 Adult Core Set can be reported by States and, in this final rulemaking, are requiring that States report on all of them.
FOOTNOTE 45 CMS released both the 2023 and 2024 Child and Adult Core Sets in
We have similarly determined that States and health home providers must report on all measures in the section 1945 and/or 1945A Health Home Core Sets, to better inform CMS evaluations of these health home programs and help us to analyze health home measures. Section 1945(g) of the Act specifies that, as a condition for receiving payment for section 1945 health home services, a health home provider shall report to the State, in accordance with such requirements as the Secretary shall specify, on all applicable measures for determining the quality of such services. Section 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act states that to receive payments for section 1945A health home services from the State a health home provider shall report to the State information on all applicable measures for determining the quality of health home services provided by such provider, including, to the extent applicable, child health quality measures and measures for centers of excellence for children with complex needs developed under title XIX, title XXI, and section 1139A of the Act. Additionally, section 1945A(g)(1)(C) of the Act requires section 1945A health home providers to report to the State such other information as the Secretary shall specify in guidance. In sum, both health home program statutes require health home providers to report to States on all applicable health home quality measures and give the Secretary discretion to identify the measures required for reporting each year. Since the inception of the section 1945 health home benefit, we have strongly encouraged States implementing that benefit to report on all applicable Health Home Core Set measures specified by the Secretary, and most have done so. Although prior to this rule, Health Home Core Set reporting has not been mandatory, we have no indication that States currently reporting the section 1945 Health Home Core Set measures have faced major burdens in doing so, and 100 percent of the current section 1945 Health Home Core Set measures can be reported using administrative claims only. When selecting measures to add to the Health Home Core Sets, we have been careful to ensure States and providers are able to report on all selected measures, and to ensure that the data provided when reporting on the measure would be useful for monitoring program performance and the quality of services provided to beneficiaries enrolled in the health home program. Based on the high rate of voluntary health home measure submission thus far, and the careful consideration we have given to measure selection, it is reasonable for CMS to expect States to comply with mandatory reporting for all measures on both of the Health Home Core Sets in the future. Additionally, since both sections 1945 and 1945A state that health home providers are statutorily required to report to the State as a condition of payment, States should have these data readily available for reporting to us. Finally, reporting of all measures on the Health Home Core Sets would inform CMS evaluation of both health home programs, assist us to identify racial, socioeconomic and geographical disparities in health outcomes, and inform future quality-related decisions about national policy for Medicaid health home programs by providing more uniform national data. Therefore, via this rule, we are mandating that both States and health home providers report on all Health Home Core sets measures, consistent with the Secretary's authority under sections 1945, 1945A, and 1902(a)(6) of the Act.
We therefore are revising the final rule as it pertains to the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets as follows. We are removing proposed
Future new mandatory measures will be added to the Core Sets through the subregulatory process described in this rule. Below is a summary of the public comments we received regarding this section and our responses.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that all States be required to report all Child and Adult Core Sets quality measures, as specified in statute at sections 1139A(a)(4)(B) and 1139B(b)(3)(B) of the Act, in the 2024 reporting year. Many commenters stated that they did not agree that the Secretary has the statutory authority to delay the reporting of selected measures for any of the Core Sets. One commenter recommended that mandatory State reporting should be required for all Child and Adult Core Sets required in statute, but that CMS could create an exceptions process for States that demonstrated that the requirement would generate unreliable data. This commenter requested that CMS ensure that States operating under such an exception report at least a standardized minimum set of measures to ensure valid comparisons across all States.
Response: Upon additional review, we agree that all of the measures on the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set should be subject to mandatory reporting in 2024, consistent with sections 1139A(a)(4)(B) and 1139B(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
Comment: Some commenters supported a phased-in approach to the inclusion of measures in mandatory reporting. One commenter recommended that CMS collect feedback from impacted interested parties on the most feasible reporting timeframe for specific measures while another recommended that States be allowed at least 2 years to begin reporting on new measures. One commenter recommended that the "Screening for Depression and Follow-up Plan" measure that is on both the Child and Adult Core Sets be required no earlier than the 2026 Core Sets. Another commenter recommended that CMS begin mandatory reporting of outcome measures using measures that only require administrative data and do not require supplementary data from other sources. Other commenters suggested several years of optional reporting for outcome and survey measures, and for measures that require EHR data.
Response: Upon additional review, we have determined that the statute requires that all of the measures on the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set should be subject to mandatory reporting in 2024. We recognize that some types of data collection are more burdensome than others, and States often struggle with collecting data for measures that depend on non-claims sources, hybrid specifications, or EHRs. We will provide technical assistance including one-on-one support to assist States with mandatory measures. /46/ The outcomes of this process would be published in annual subregulatory guidance, as finalized in
FOOTNOTE 46 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter recommended allowing States flexibility to determine the approach for hybrid- and survey-based measures based on their delivery system and not limiting reporting to one survey type, noting that a survey from an MCO that only serves beneficiaries with serious mental illness would not be comparable to other survey populations.
Response: We appreciate that there is considerable variability between States in how populations are served within their delivery systems and programs and how these populations are represented in State-level and health home program-level reporting. Despite these differences we believe the use of standardized quality measures, reporting guidance, and reporting is needed to accurately assess and compare data across populations and time and to allow for identification of more specific quality improvement opportunities. Use of alternative measures or survey types would undermine this goal. Therefore, we are not making any changes to
Comment: Several commenters made recommendations regarding the survey-based measures in the Child and Adult Core Sets, such as those based on the CAHPS survey. A few commenters recommended that CMS require States to report data biennially (that is, once every 2 years) for all health outcome and survey-based measures. However, one commenter stated that they preferred annual reporting due to the loss of measure consistency, need to monitor quality improvement projects, and staffing and training issues. One commenter recommended that CMS consider the impact of declining response rates to surveys on Core Set reporting, and avoid duplicating efforts, noting that MCOs are also required to conduct CAHPS surveys. Some commenters encouraged CMS to explore alternative patient experience measures before phasing-in mandatory reporting of CAHPS-based measures.
Response: We intend to require annual reporting of health outcome and survey-based measures, which aligns with CHIP reporting requirements in section 2108(e) of the Act, as implemented through section 402 of CHIPRA. Specifically, Title XXI programs are required to annually submit to CMS data regarding access to primary and specialty services, access to networks of care, and care coordination provided under the State child health plan, using quality of care and consumer satisfaction measures included in the CAHPS survey. However, we appreciate the concerns raised regarding barriers to annual reporting of these measures and believe it is important for us to have the flexibility to reconsider frequency as needed based on State feedback. Therefore, we have revised
3. Populations Required for Mandatory Reporting
In section II.D.3. of the proposed rule, we explained that we interpret sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act to require that reporting for the Child Core Set include all beneficiaries covered by Medicaid and CHIP and to require that reporting for the behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Sets include all beneficiaries covered by Medicaid. We further explained that this would include beneficiaries enrolled in all Medicaid and CHIP delivery systems as well as services received in all applicable health care settings, such as hospitals, outpatient settings, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), rural health clinics (RHCs), and facilities operated by IHS, by Tribes and Tribal Organizations under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, and by Urban Indian Organizations under Title V of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act.
We also explained in section II.D.3. of the proposed rule that sections 1945(g), 1945(c)(4)(B), 1945A(g)(1)(B), and 1945(g)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, together with section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, support CMS guidance requiring State reporting on the Health Home Core Sets to include all beneficiaries enrolled in the applicable health home program. We further explained that this would include health home program beneficiaries receiving services through all Medicaid delivery systems, as well as health home program beneficiaries who received Medicaid-covered services in all applicable health care settings, such as hospitals, outpatient settings, FQHCs, RHCs, and facilities operated by IHS, Tribes and Tribal Organizations, and Urban Indian Organizations, during the measurement period. Further, we explained that we anticipated that health home programs would have to report on beneficiaries who have received Medicaid-covered health home services in FQHCs, RHCs, and facilities operated by IHS, Tribes and Tribal Organizations, and Urban Indian Organizations only if a beneficiary who is enrolled in the applicable health home program received Medicaid-covered health home services in one of these settings during the measurement period.
As explained in the proposed rule, we ultimately expected to require States to report on the populations discussed previously in this final rule for each Core Set through the annual reporting guidance; however, we did not propose to require this to begin with 2024 Core Set reporting in light of concerns about whether it would be feasible for States to begin reporting on all populations as soon as the rule would apply. Therefore, we proposed that the Secretary could, through the annual reporting guidance, phase in reporting on certain populations. Specifically, we proposed at
Comment: We received several comments supporting full mandatory reporting for all populations. However, many comments about these proposals noted concerns and challenges with reporting for specific populations of beneficiaries, such as those who are dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid; those whose Medicaid or CHIP coverage is limited to payment of premiums and/or cost sharing, which may include those with private insurance; and those who receive services through Tribes and Tribal Organizations. We also received comments encouraging CMS to consider allowing States the ability to identify specific populations where reporting is difficult due to unique State circumstances.
Response: Although the majority of comments addressed concerns with including specific discrete populations in reporting of the Child and Adult Core Sets, we continue to believe that the intention of the statute is to provide the most comprehensive quality information on as much of the population as possible. Our view is that
With respect to the Health Home Core Sets, for the following reasons, we have determined that States with section 1945 or 1945A health home programs must report on all beneficiaries enrolled in the applicable health home program or programs, with no exceptions. Reporting on all populations served in health home programs will provide us with more accurate and comprehensive data that will help inform us of the effect of the health home benefits on coordination of care and aid us in identifying ethnic, racial and socioeconomic disparities. Also, reporting on all beneficiaries allows improved analysis of the quality of services rendered to persons enrolled in health home programs; such reporting can be utilized as a tool for the Annual Core Set Measures Workgroup when evaluating how a measure is contributing to the overall CMS mission of quality improvement for all populations served. Additionally, States will have Health Home Core Set measure data on all populations enrolled in the applicable health home from their health home providers, which are required to provide it to the State as a condition of payment under sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g) of the Act. Since the requirement for providers to report the data collected at the program level to States has been in effect from the beginning of both benefits, most states that have implemented the 1945 health home benefit have been voluntarily reporting on the health home core set for all populations. The 1945A health home benefit has not been in effect long enough to have data on a reporting cycle. Additionally, the population enrolled in health home programs is usually small and easily identifiable through existing data collected at the program level. Therefore, we have added
We address concerns about the feasibility of Child and Adult Core Sets reporting for specific populations in the final rule in two ways. First, because we recognize that there are certain populations for which all States potentially face difficulties in obtaining data, we are revising
Second, as set forth in [Sec.]
Below is a summary of the public comments we received regarding this section and our responses.
Comment: Several commenters supported the requirement that States include populations that are harder to report in Core Set reporting, as outlined in the proposed rule, including those who are dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, those who use long-term services and supports, people with substance use disorders, and people in FFS Medicaid, including in States that enroll most people in managed care.
Response: We thank these commenters for their support of required reporting for these populations.
Comment: Multiple commenters requested additional clarification from CMS on how States should allocate beneficiaries who experience gaps in coverage or who are enrolled in multiple plans during the reporting period. Specifically, in some States, commenters noted that FFS enrollment is temporary until a beneficiary selects a managed care plan. In other States, FFS populations may comprise a very small percentage of total Medicaid enrollment. The commenters recommended that CMS consider whether the inclusion of the beneficiaries temporarily enrolled in FFS in Core Set reporting is an appropriate use of significant State resources.
Response: As discussed in section II.D.3. of this final rule, we interpret sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act to require reporting of all beneficiaries covered by Medicaid and CHIP for the Child Core Set, and to require reporting for the behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set of all beneficiaries covered by Medicaid. Additionally, as discussed previously in this section of this final rule, we are requiring in this final rule that reporting for the Health Home Core Sets include all beneficiaries enrolled in the applicable health home program. Attribution of performance and quality data poses challenges for the health care field, and Medicaid and CHIP in particular, as it requires striking a balance between the person-centered goal of measuring quality of care for a beneficiary regardless of delivery system and feasibility for providers, plans, health systems, and States. Our intent in implementing mandatory reporting requirements is for the data collected to be as inclusive of all beneficiaries as possible. However, when developing annual guidance, we will consider what distinctions between delivery systems are meaningful, being mindful of short-term transitions.
Comment: Multiple commenters supported a phased-in approach to the inclusion of populations in mandatory reporting but provided different recommendations about the approach CMS should take. One commenter recommended that CMS collect feedback from affected and interested parties on the most feasible reporting timeframe for specific populations. Another commenter requested that States have the flexibility to make the decisions about phasing in reporting of populations that are challenging to report on a timeframe that is feasible for each State. One commenter recommended that phasing in reporting for any given population should be limited to no more than 3 years, while others noted that 2 to 5 years is the minimum amount of time needed. One commenter recommended that CMS extend the phase-in period beyond 5 years, proposing up to 7 years to phase in fully reporting all measures for all populations. Several commenters recommended allowing more time before CMS phases in mandatory reporting for other populations, such as dually eligible beneficiaries; recommendations varied from as soon as 3 years to 10 years.
Response: Commenters had varying preferences regarding the amount of time that we should provide for phasing in mandatory reporting on specific populations; some commenters recommended that we give States the flexibility to decide what populations they are able to report on, based on their unique circumstances. While reporting on standardized populations will help us achieve data consistency across States and provide actionable data to identify disparities and support efforts to improve the quality of health care, we recognize, based on the range of years supported in public comments, that the ability of States to report on the Child and Adult Core Sets for certain populations may vary, and there are unique circumstances which may result in States' inability to report on certain populations in a given year. As discussed previously in this final rule, we have revised
We have also revised [Sec.]
Comment: Multiple commenters noted concerns with accessing claims data for beneficiaries who may be enrolled in Medicaid only for premium assistance programs. Multiple commenters requested that CMS provide clarification that the rule would not apply to individuals who have both Medicaid coverage and private insurance coverage, as the Medicaid agency would not have access to claims information from the member's private plan.
Response: We agree with the commenters that reporting Child and Adult Core Set measures for beneficiaries whose Medicaid or CHIP coverage is limited to payment of private insurance premiums and/or cost sharing may be challenging, as States currently do not have consistent access to data needed from the liable third-party payer, and as discussed previously in this final rule, we are revising
Comment: Several commenters opposed mandatory State reporting for the dually eligible population and suggested that CMS should be the responsible party for reporting on the dually eligible population as Medicare is the primary payer for most benefits and services for these beneficiaries. A few commenters recommended that CMS should limit mandatory State reporting for dually eligible beneficiaries to delivery systems or measures where the State is directly accountable. One commenter recommended limiting reporting to States that operate Statewide, fully-integrated models for dually eligible beneficiaries (for example, fully integrated dual eligible special needs plans), and one commenter recommended limiting reporting on Core Set measures for dually eligible beneficiaries to measures for which the State is directly accountable so that the quality reporting on dually eligible beneficiaries is reflective of the payer of services.
Response: We recognize the concerns about States' ability to report on the dually eligible population when States are not the primary payer for most health care services for this population. We disagree that States should not report on all dually eligible individuals in the States' reporting of Core Sets measures. Dually eligible individuals experience the health care system and incur health outcomes as individuals, regardless of whether Medicare or Medicaid pays for the service. The purpose of the Child and Adult Core Sets is to measure the overall national quality of care for beneficiaries, which is not limited to services reimbursed by Medicaid or CHIP. The main goal of the health home programs is to improve health outcomes for beneficiaries through care coordination that is intended to better link primary, behavioral health, and long-term services and supports for beneficiaries served by the health home program. The Health Home Core Sets will be used for ongoing monitoring and evaluation purposes across all State health home programs to measure this goal. As discussed previously, States are expected to have the data they need to report on the Health Home Core Sets from health home providers and therefore are not expected to experience challenges in reporting for dually eligible individuals. We recognize that States must obtain, link, and analyze Medicare data in order to report the Child and Adult Core Sets of measures for fee-for-service beneficiaries, and that States do not have access to encounter data for Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage), and we expect to phase in required reporting of Child and Adult Core Set measures for dually eligible beneficiaries. We will include information, including available technical assistance, on mandatory Child and Adult Core Sets reporting for this population in annual reporting guidance. Since all States that commented on the proposed rule, including those States that currently participate in the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program, requested more time to obtain, link, and analyze Medicare data, we will work with States and interested parties to identify the timeframe for which mandatory Child and Adult Core Sets reporting for dually eligible beneficiaries will be required. Additionally, we will continue to assess whether we can use T-MSIS or other alternative data sources to calculate Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets measures on behalf of States.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern about access to and the availability of assistance with using the Medicare FFS claims and Part D events data that are needed to report on dually eligible beneficiaries and were concerned that States would require extensive resources to utilize the data. They further commented that CMS is disadvantaging States, as this data is very difficult to obtain and out of their control. A few commenters encouraged CMS to facilitate State participation in the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program. A commenter recommended CMS establish a standardized data license/sharing agreement to facilitate Medicare data requests for the dually eligible population.
Response: Since 2011, we have provided States access to Medicare FFS claims and Part D events data for dually eligible beneficiaries, including dually eligible beneficiaries whose Medicaid or CHIP coverage is limited to payment of premiums and/or cost sharing (also known as partial-benefit dually eligible beneficiaries), free-of-charge via the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program. Information on the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program, including how to request data and the standard data sharing agreements, is available through the
Information on the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program, including on how to request data and the standard data sharing agreements, is available at https://www.cms.gov/Medicare-Medicaid-Coordination/Medicare-and-Medicaid-Coordination/Medicare-Medicaid-Coordination-Office/StateAccesstoMedicareData or by contacting the
Comment: Multiple commenters supported provision of technical assistance to States on inclusion of those dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid and recommended that CMS provide open-source tools, opportunities for shared learning, assistance in developing data infrastructure, guidance on how to link Medicaid and Medicare data, data infrastructure, model analysis with T-MSIS data, and standardized Medicare data packages tailored to Core Set analysis. A commenter recommended considering the work of the
Response: We plan to provide technical assistance on Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets reporting for dually eligible beneficiaries and will take these ideas into consideration when developing technical assistance resources and learning opportunities.
Comment: Several commenters were concerned about the lack of available Medicare Part C encounter data. These commenters explained that States cannot report on dually eligible beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Part C without these data.
Response: We recognize that we do not currently make available Medicare Advantage data to States free-of-charge via the Medicare-Medicaid Data Sharing Program. We are looking into how to address this issue. We do not intend to require that States report Child and Adult Core Set measures on dually eligible beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Part C (that is, in Medicare Advantage) until such data are available. Specific to Health Home Core Sets, States collect data from the provider at the program level for this population to inform the health home measures, and therefore the health home measures do not rely on Medicare claims data. We will consider implications of data access when reviewing measures for possible addition to the Health Home Core Sets in future years.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern with reporting of Medicaid FFS beneficiaries in their State, as they may not meet continuous enrollment requirements for quality measurement. Another commenter noted that there is a significant burden for including Medicaid FFS beneficiaries in State-wide reporting of hybrid measures.
Response: The purpose of the Child and Adult Core Sets, as suggested by sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act, is to measure the overall national quality of care for beneficiaries, monitor performance at the State level, and improve the quality of health care. The main goal of the health home programs is to improve health outcomes for beneficiaries through care coordination that is intended to better link primary, behavioral health, and long-term services and supports for beneficiaries served by the health home program. /47/ /48/ The Health Home Core Sets will be used for ongoing monitoring and evaluation purposes across all State health home programs to measure progress towards this goal. While we recognize the additional burden to States that may not currently include Medicaid FFS beneficiaries in their reporting, in order to improve the quality of care delivered to all beneficiaries, States must include in reporting the entire population covered by Medicaid and CHIP (or served by the applicable health home program), including Medicaid FFS beneficiaries, except to the extent the Secretary exempts a population from reporting for Child and/or Adult Core Sets measures in annual guidance or grants a state exemption for a specific population for a specific reporting year, as discussed in detail previously in this section. We have revised
FOOTNOTE 47 https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/medicaid-state-technical-assistance/health-home-information-resource-center/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 48 https://www.medicaid.gov/resources-for-states/medicaid-state-technical-assistance/health-home-information-resource-center/1945a-health-home-resources/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter suggested CMS test the validity of mandatory measures that have been expanded to include additional populations, specifically populations that may be more difficult to include, prior to public reporting, and that CMS ensure that risk adjustment models of mandatory measures are robust enough to provide fair comparisons when including expanded populations. This commenter further recommended that CMS work with measure developers to evaluate the fit of the risk adjustment models for mandatory measures prior to reporting results publicly to ensure they generate meaningful information and allow for fair comparisons.
Response: We anticipate that our Core Set reporting guidance will align with measure steward technical specifications with regard to defining the populations included in the measure and to risk adjustment. If the measure steward includes risk adjustment for a measure on the Core Sets, we will include risk adjustment for that measure. We work with measure stewards to adapt measures for State level reporting and provide appropriate reporting guidance. The issue of validity testing of mandatory measures is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Comment: Several commenters noted that decisions about whether to submit health care data necessary to calculate Core Set measures for beneficiaries receiving care from Indian Health Care Providers (IHCPs) rest with the Tribes and Tribal Organizations, and any CMS rules about data completeness must respect Tribal sovereignty and Tribes' decisions about whether to submit health care data. One commenter noted that the addition of health care facility data from IHS, Tribes, and Tribal Organizations would require significant technical assistance and funding from CMS to facilitate the development of needed infrastructure to support these providers' readiness to capture required data elements, and to assist with data transmission.
Response: We understand that Tribes and Tribal providers take seriously their role in protecting the confidentiality of American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) data and note that State Core Set data is de-identified before it is submitted to us for Core Set reporting. We also recognize that States enter into individual contractual and data use agreements with Tribes and Tribal providers that may affect the availability of Tribal data for Core Sets reporting. States might choose to require their Medicaid providers to report certain data to the State as a condition of receiving Medicaid payment, if doing so would help the State comply with the Core Sets reporting requirements. We strongly encourage States to consult with Tribes and to coordinate with IHS, and Tribes and Tribal Organizations, to discuss reporting of Child and Adult Core Set measures regarding the services provided by IHS and Tribal health care providers in their State. Collaborative relationships between government entities and Tribes are essential to responsible and effective data use and to understanding and addressing the gaps in these data, /49/ which limit analyses that support public health decision-making in AI/AN communities. /50/ Any delay of reporting data for AI/AN beneficiaries will impede efforts to improve health outcomes for these populations, and we encourage Tribes to report Core Set data to their respective States to help improve the quality of their State's Medicaid program, and ultimately the quality of health care provided to AI/AN individuals.
FOOTNOTE 49 https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/gaps-strategies-improving-american-indianalaska-nativenative-american-data#TOC. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 50 https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104698. END FOOTNOTE
As discussed previously in this final rule, States are required to report Child and Adult Core Sets quality measure data for all populations, unless a population is identified as optional in annual subregulatory guidance to be issued by CMS, and States may request a 1-year exemption from reporting mandatory populations for one or more measures on the Child and Adult Core Sets if the State demonstrates an inability to obtain access to data, which may include for example, an inability to obtain needed third-party data or to finalize a necessary data-sharing agreement between parties before the reporting deadline. Moreover, this final rule requires States and health home providers to report data on all populations enrolled in the applicable health home. If Tribes or Tribal Organizations are providing section 1945 or section 1945A health home services, sections 1945 and 1945A of the Act require them to report data to the State as a condition of payment for these health home services, as discussed in more detail previously in this final rule.
E. Application of the Child and Adult Core Sets to CHIP
As discussed in section II.E. of the proposed rule, in [Sec.]
We received public comments on the application of mandatory reporting to CHIP, and in general, commenters supported the proposed process. We are finalizing these provisions with revisions to [Sec.]
Comment: Several commenters supported CMS' proposal, in section II.E. of the proposed rule, to include pregnant individuals receiving coverage under CHIP, including those provided CHIP child health assistance for the duration of pregnancy (also referred to as the "unborn option"), in the mandatory reporting requirements for the Child Core Set, if the pregnant individual meets the age parameters for the measures. One commenter requested guidance on whether States would be required to report quality measures for pregnant individuals receiving coverage through the option to extend special CHIP child health assistance for the duration of pregnancy and whether States would be required to include this population in Adult Core Set reporting.
Response: We appreciate the support from these commenters. We are finalizing the mandatory reporting requirements as proposed in
Comment: One commenter recommended that individuals receiving coverage under CHIP should also be included in reporting for any measures from the Adult Core Set that the State reports on for their CHIP population.
Response: Section 1139B(b)(3)(B) of the Act makes reporting by States on the Adult Core Set measures mandatory only with respect to the quality of behavioral health care provided to Medicaid-eligible adults. As a result, States are encouraged, but not required, to report on the measures in the Adult Core Set for beneficiaries in separate CHIP programs as per
Comment: One commenter requested guidance on whether CMS would give States the option to report by combining the Child Core Set State-level data and section 1945 health home program data.
Response: We will provide technical assistance and further details on how small population sizes should be handled through our reporting guidance. Under this final rule, data would be reported separately at the health home program level for the Health Home Core Sets and the State level for the Child and Adult Core Sets. Given these different denominators for these obligations, we do not plan to combine these reporting requirements.
Comment: One commenter noted that their State enrollment under the special CHIP child assistance option for pregnant individuals is very low and reporting on it will have little impact on the overall rate. Another commenter noted that many individuals who receive special CHIP child assistance for pregnant individuals would not meet the eligibility requirements for reporting, such as receiving CHIP for the duration of the pregnancy or age requirements, and as such, collection of the data may not be a good use of data resources.
Response: While the special CHIP child assistance for pregnant individuals is reflective of a very specific and relatively small population, we believe it is important to gather data for as many populations as possible. In some cases of small population sizes, core set measure data would not be reported separately, but would be included in reports of larger populations. We will provide technical assistance and further details on how small population sizes should be handled through our reporting guidance. We will follow data suppression policies for measure stewards in addition to our Cell Size Suppression Policy such that if sample sizes are too small, data will not be publicly reported to avoid a potential violation of privacy. /51/
FOOTNOTE 51 CMS Cell Suppression Policy: https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/document/cms-cell-suppression-policy. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter encouraged CMS to adhere to measure steward specifications and urged that if CMS expands the denominator beyond those specifications, such as including individuals without 12 months of data, CMS should assess the validity and actionability of the measures.
Response: We will take this feedback into consideration when developing Core Set reporting guidance. We will provide technical assistance and further details on enrollment requirements for inclusion of beneficiaries in Core Set reporting through our reporting guidance. In order to be included in Core Set reporting, beneficiaries must still meet enrollment requirements for quality measurement, which are established by the measure stewards for each measure and based on a beneficiary's continuous enrollment in Medicaid and CHIP. This would ensure that the State has enough time to render services during the measurement period and would be based on a beneficiary's enrollment date in Medicaid and CHIP (not inclusive of retroactive eligibility). In making measure adaptations, we work closely with measure stewards to develop reporting guidance and to make as few adaptations to the technical specifications as possible.
1. Separate Reporting of the Child Core Set for Medicaid and CHIP Beneficiaries
As discussed in section II.D.4. of the proposed rule, in [Sec.]
In response to comments received, we have revised [Sec.]
Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed rule proposal to require adherence to the same reporting guidance for Medicaid (funded through Title XIX and Title XXI) and separate CHIP programs, and recommended that the proposed language at
Response: In response to public comment, we have revised [Sec.]
Comment: Several commenters did not support separate reporting of children in Medicaid and CHIP. They thought that it added little value and would result in an additional reporting burden, as combined reporting more closely aligns with how services are provided. Instead, one commenter recommended combining reporting for Medicaid and CHIP, and using attribution to determine to which program beneficiaries should be assigned. One commenter recommended CMS allow aggregate reporting to align with current State practices, while another commenter asked if separate or combined reporting of CHIP could be determined at the State level.
Response: Separate CHIP programs have different service requirements than Medicaid. Therefore, we expect that results for certain measures could vary within States for separate CHIP and Medicaid. We believe these differences are important to document, and therefore are maintaining the requirement at [Sec.]
Comment: One commenter suggested that any separate CHIP reporting should be limited to administrative measures that are in the control of MCOs.
Response: The Core Sets are State-level and health home program-level reporting programs, not managed care or health plan-level reporting programs. One of the goals of mandatory reporting is to provide inclusive data on quality and performance for all beneficiaries, regardless of delivery system. We will provide technical assistance to address the needs of States and State partners to report the Core Sets.
Comment: Several commenters noted that if States were required to report results for Medicaid and CHIP separately, a separate CAHPS survey for CHIP would be required. Multiple surveys would result in significant cost increases, require additional time to implement, and increase the potential for insufficient sample sizes.
Response: We will take this feedback into consideration as part of the guidance process that is discussed in the rule. Section 2108(e)(4) of the Act requires states to collect and report CAHPS survey results for Title XXI CHIP programs (see CHIPRA section 402(a)(2)) as part of their annual reports to the Secretary. Reporting CAHPS survey results separately currently is encouraged for voluntary Core Set reporting, and several States successfully do so. We note that previous CMS guidance outlines how States can sample and report CHIP and Medicaid results separately for CAHPS. /52/
FOOTNOTE 52 Fact Sheet 2012: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/cahpsfactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: One commenter supported the proposal that CMS include attribution rules in reporting guidance for counting children who move between Medicaid and separate CHIP. One commenter recommended that States be required to include children that meet continuous enrollment criteria in reporting for CHIP, as is required for Medicaid reporting and enrollment criteria, in order to allow for better comparisons. This commenter requested a separate population category for enrollees transitioning from Medicaid to CHIP if CMS were to require reporting on this group, noting that combining these data for children who transition between programs would be burdensome. Multiple commenters acknowledged the need to include children in Child Core Set reporting who transition between Medicaid and CHIP in order to promote consistency and prevent duplicative reporting. Some commenters raised concerns that inconsistencies in Medicaid and CHIP requirements could make it difficult to combine these two groups for reporting.
Response: We plan to provide detailed guidance about attribution rules in the annual reporting guidance required under
Comment: One commenter noted that some States with small separate CHIP programs may have difficulty reporting on their CHIP population and requested technical assistance and support from CMS to address data collection and calculation challenges.
Response: We appreciate these comments and concerns and will provide technical assistance to meet the needs of States and State partners. /53/
FOOTNOTE 53 Technical Assistance Fact Sheet: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/downloads/tafactsheet.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
F. Ensuring Compliance With the Mandatory Reporting Requirements
As discussed in section II.F. of the proposed rule, in
We also proposed changes to
We received public comments on compliance requirements, and in general, commenters supported the proposed process. We are finalizing these provisions with a minor wording change to
Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed standards that States must meet to qualify for enhanced Federal matching funds for Medicaid systems and encouraged the Secretary to use this authority to enforce compliance with mandatory reporting of the Core Set measures. One commenter asked for more information on Federal matching funds for systems.
Response: We thank the commenters for their support for our proposal to use these Federal authorities to enforce compliance with Core Set requirements. CMS regulations at 42 CFR part 433, subpart C specify conditions that State Medicaid systems must meet in order for the State's expenditures on mechanized claims processing and information retrieval systems to be matched at the 90 and 75 percent rates described in section 1903(a)(3)(A)(i) and (B) of the Act. These conditions include industry standards described in
FOOTNOTE 54 See section 1903(a)(3)(A)(i) and (B) of the Act, 42 CFR 433.15(b)(3) and (4), subpart C of 42 CFR part 433, and State Medicaid Director Letter (SMDL) #22-001. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 55 Medicaid Enterprise Systems Compliance and Reapproval Process for State Systems with Operational Costs Claimed at the 75 Percent Federal Match Rate CIB at https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/cib052423.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Additional information about FFP rates for State Medicaid system design, development, and installation (including of enhancements) and operation available under section 1903(a)(3)(A)(i) and (B) of the Act can be found in the Mechanized Claims Processing and Information Retrieval Systems regulations at 42 CFR part 433, subpart C. Separately, under section 1903(a)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act, State expenditures for Medicaid system development and modifications necessary for collecting and reporting on child health quality measures are matched at the State's FMAP rate as defined in section 1905(b) of the Act.
Comment: Some commenters suggested CMS should develop more explicit guidance outlining specific, graduated enforcement mechanisms for States that remain out of compliance with quality reporting requirements, in order to ensure clear enforcement action is taken against States and other entities that fail to comply and encourage State corrective action.
Response: As noted previously in this final rule, States will be required to submit a Medicaid SPA attesting that the State agency will report on the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets in accordance with the requirements in 42 CFR part 437, as finalized in
FOOTNOTE 56 Medicaid Enterprise Systems Compliance and Reapproval Process for State Systems with Operational Costs Claimed at the 75 Percent Federal Match Rate CIB at https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/cib052423.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Several commenters supported the proposed requirement that States amend their State Plans to indicate that they would report on the Core Sets in order to give CMS clear authority to enforce the Core Set reporting requirements by withholding Federal Medicaid payments under section 1904 of the Act in the event of noncompliance by a State. One commenter requested clarification on the deadline for submission of the SPA.
Response: We appreciate the support for this proposed Medicaid requirement at
Comment: Several commenters suggested that requiring Health Home programs to submit Core Set measures to the State as a condition of receiving payment, in addition to the State reporting to CMS, is duplicative and redundant.
Response: While we appreciate the submission of these comments, the proposed rule implements statutory reporting requirements that health home providers must meet, as a condition of payment, under sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1) of the Act. If a Health Home provider is submitting all required data into a State-based system that the State is then using to calculate and report the Health Home Core Sets measures to CMS, that would satisfy the statutory requirement for providers under sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1) of the Act.
Comment: A few commenters recommended that CMS change 42 CFR 431.16, which implements section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, to specify that the State plan requirements include the reporting of the Core Sets and underscore the importance of State compliance with Core Sets reporting.
Response: Section 431.16 requires that States comply with all reporting requirements established by the Secretary and that their State plans reflect that the State will do so. Section 431.16 does not list any specific reports that States are required to submit, and we do not believe it would be appropriate to single out Core Sets reporting alone. Further, it is not necessary to do so, as the current language of
III. Collection of Information Requirements
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), we are required to provide 60-day notice in the
To fairly evaluate whether an information collection must be approved by OMB, section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires that we solicit comment on the following issues:
* The need for the information collection and its usefulness in carrying out the proper functions of our agency.
* The accuracy of our estimate of the information collection burden.
* The quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
* Recommendations to minimize the information collection burden on the affected public, including automated collection techniques.
In our
A. Wage Estimates
Private Sector, States, and Territories: To derive average costs, we used data from the
FOOTNOTE 57 The costs associated with our
Table 1-National Occupational Employment And Wage Estimates
Occupation title Occupation Mean hourly Fringe benefits Adjusted
code wage and other hourly wage
( $/hr) indirect costs ( $/hr)
( $/hr)
Business Operations Specialists 13-1000 40.04 40.04 80.08
Chief Executives 11-1011 118.48 118.48 236.96
Computer Programmers 15-1251 49.42 49.42 98.84
Data Entry/Information Processing 43-9020 18.97 18.97 37.94
Workers
General Operations Manager 11-1021 59.07 59.07 118.14
Statistician 15-2041 50.73 50.73 101.46
As indicated, we are adjusting our employee hourly wage estimates by a factor of 100 percent. This is necessarily a rough adjustment, both because fringe benefits and overhead costs vary significantly from employer to employer, and because methods of estimating these costs vary widely from study to study. Nonetheless, we believe that doubling the hourly wage to estimate total cost is a reasonably accurate estimation method.
To estimate the burden on States, it was important to consider the Federal government's contribution to the cost of administering the Medicaid and CHIP programs. The Federal government provides Federal Medicaid funds for medical assistance based on an FMAP that is established for each State, based on the per capita income in the State as compared to the national average. FMAPs range from a minimum of 50 percent in States with higher per capita incomes to a maximum of 83 percent in States with lower per capita incomes. States receive an "enhanced" FMAP for administering their CHIP programs, ranging from 65 to 85 percent. Medicaid funding for
FOOTNOTE 58 See section 1905(ff) of the Act. END FOOTNOTE
Beneficiaries: We believe that the cost for beneficiaries undertaking administrative and other tasks on their own time is a post-tax wage of
FOOTNOTE 59 https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_legacy_files//176806/VOT.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 60 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LEU0252881500A. END FOOTNOTE
Unlike our State and private sector wage adjustments, we are not adjusting beneficiary wages for fringe benefits and other indirect costs since the individuals' activities, if any, would occur outside the scope of their employment.
B. Information Collection Requirements (ICRs)
The following collection of information requirements and burden estimates were posted for public review and submitted to OMB for review under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26 for the Child Core Set and the Adult Core Set and CMS-10434 #47 for the Health Home Core Sets) in association with the
Under sections 1139A, 1139B, and 1902(a)(6) of the Act, we have the authority to collect quality metrics on State-specific Medicaid and CHIP programs for the purpose of: measuring the overall national quality of care for Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries, monitoring performance at the State-level, and improving the quality of health care. Under sections 1902(a)(6), 1945(c)(4)(B), 1945(g), and 1945A(g) of the Act, in this final rule, we are requiring States that are implementing the section 1945 and/or section 1945A health home benefits to report on certain quality measures to the Secretary and to require their health home providers to report on these same measures to the State. The reported data is intended to provide a comprehensive landscape of the quality of care provided by Medicaid and CHIP, because the measures focus on a range of topics including access to primary and preventive care, maternal and perinatal health care, care of acute and chronic conditions, behavioral health care, dental and oral health care, long term services and supports, and overall experience of care.
Currently, Child, Adult, and section 1945 Health Home Core Sets reporting is voluntary for States but highly encouraged. Under this final rule, our voluntary annual reporting requirements will become mandatory for States for the: Child Core Set (CMS-10434 #26), behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set (also CMS-10434 #26), and the section 1945 and forthcoming section 1945A Health Home Core Sets (CMS-10434 #47). /61/ This final rule does not add, remove, or revise any of the existing measures in any of the aforementioned Core Sets. Annual updates to the Core Sets will continue to be made as required by sections 1139A and 1139B of the Act for the Child and Adult Core Sets and this annual update process will also be applied to both Health Home Core Sets as described in section I.C. of this preamble and [Sec.]
FOOTNOTE 61 Core Set Measure lists: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Under this final rule, we anticipate that the mandatory reporting burden for States would increase in comparison to the current voluntary Core Set reporting burden, including anticipated burden to States for system changes as a result of this final rule. This is due to the mandatory nature of the data collection which may increase: the number of measures reported by States, adherence to the reporting guidance provided by CMS, and stratification of data by delivery system and demographic characteristics. However, many of the mandatory measures can be calculated from alternate data sources. For example, we have been working to use T-MSIS (CMS-R-284, OMB 0938-0345) reporting to generate measure reporting on behalf of States. Among the three Core Sets, approximately 50 measures will become mandatory (the Child Core Set measures, behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set, and the 1945 and 1945A Health Home Core Sets of measures for States with a health home program), two of which we currently report for States and
The data fields included in Core Set reporting templates are determined by the measure stewards who own the measures. We are not the measure steward for most measures, and therefore, do not control the actual data fields for most of the measures in the Core Sets. As a result, the templates used for Core Sets reporting will not be published for public comment. Instead, measure stewards implement a separate process for public comment during measure development and measurement updates. We also have recommendations in the CMS Measures Management System Blueprint for a similar process for public comment during measure development. /62/
FOOTNOTE 62 https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/MMS/MMS-Blueprint. END FOOTNOTE
We are adding SPA preprints to the final rule package under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26) for the Child Core Set and the Adult Core Set and CMS-10434 #22, entitled: "Health Home State Plan Amendment (SPA)") for the Health Home Core Sets. These preprints were excluded from the proposed rule package, but the contents of the preprints were described under the collection of information requirements, and the burden estimates were included under ICR #1 in the proposed rule. The final rule's preprint does not deviate from those descriptions: "that the agency would report on the Child and Adult Core Sets in accordance with the requirements in
Subsequent to the proposed rule we have revised [Sec.]
As noted previously in this rule, we received one public comment related to the collection of information requirements calculation of the burden estimate, which applied to the estimates provided for reporting the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets. The comment, and our response can be found in section III.C. of this final rule.
The burden for reporting voluntary Adult Core Set measures (the measures outside of behavioral health measures) for States to report is not included in this rule's ICR discussions as the mandatory reporting requirements being implemented with this final rule do not apply to the voluntary measures; however, these costs will be included under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26). The burden to health home providers for reporting section 1945 and section 1945A Health Home Core Sets data to States is not included in this rule's ICR discussions or under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #47) as this final rule outlines State requirements to comply with reporting the Health Home Core Sets. The burden to health home providers for reporting the section 1945 and section 1945A Health Home Core Sets along with the development of a Health Home SPA is approved by OMB under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #22, entitled: "Health Home State Plan Amendment (SPA)").
1. ICRs Regarding Attestation of Mandatory Reporting (
The following changes will be submitted to OMB for their approval under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26 and CMS-10434 #22). As noted previously in this final rule, we are changing the package under which the Health Home Core Sets SPA preprint is associated from control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #47) to 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #22, entitled: "Health Home State Plan Amendment (SPA)") as this package (CMS-10434 #22) is associated with the health home program State plan requirements.
With the changes outlined in this final rule, the 50 States, DC,
We estimate it would take a business operations specialist 2 hours at
Table 2-Attestation Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188
Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted cost
under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) ( $ )
CFR responses (hr) (50% FMAP
or FFP)
[Sec.] 437.20-One-time 54 54 2 108 Varies 10,019 5,009
SPA Submission * (162 hr x
2/3 )
* States will be required to submit a SPA that attests that the State will be in compliance with Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets reporting. Every State would complete the SPA and States with a Health Home would only have to identify as applicable.
Table 3-Attestation Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188
Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted cost
under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) ( $ )
CFR responses (hr) (50% FMAP
or FFP)
[Sec.] 437.20-One-time 54 54 1 54 (162 Varies 5,009 2,505
SPA Submission * hr x
1/3 )
* States will be required to submit a SPA that attests that the State will be in compliance with Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets reporting. Every State would complete the SPA and States with a Health Home would only have to identify as applicable.
2. ICRs Regarding Core Set of Children's Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid and CHIP (Child Core Set) (Part 437, Subpart A)
The following will be submitted to OMB for their approval under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26).
As required by section 50102(b) of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, a new subparagraph (B) was added to section 1139A(a)(4) of the Act to mandate annual reporting of the Child Core Set beginning with the annual State report on FFY 2024. As referenced in section II.A. of this final rule, mandatory reporting of the Child Core Set will be required for all 50 States, DC,
The burden for each respondent is dependent on the State reporting structure and the status of the State's Medicaid and CHIP programs. Currently, there are 14 States and territories with Medicaid expansion CHIP only, 2 States with separate CHIPs, and 38 States with both Medicaid expansion and separate CHIPs. /63/ We expect the burden for States with separate CHIPs or both types of CHIPs to be higher than for States with Medicaid expansion CHIP only. This is because States with separate CHIPs or both types of CHIPs would have to report data for children enrolled across both Medicaid and CHIP. This would result in more complex data sets and would require the State to conduct the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey twice, once for Medicaid and once for CHIP. /64/ To account for the added reporting and survey effort for States with separate CHIP or with both Medicaid expansion and separate CHIPs, we have applied a multiplier of 1.5 to the burden hours for Child Core Set measure reporting and a multiplier of 2 to the burden estimate for conducting and reporting CAHPS survey data.
FOOTNOTE 63 https://www.medicaid.gov/chip/downloads/chip-map.pdf. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 64 The
For the 14 States with Medicaid expansion CHIP only, we expect that the reporting of approximately 25 Child Core Set measures would take: 154 hours at
FOOTNOTE 65 Child Core Set: https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/performance-measurement/adult-and-child-health-care-quality-measures/childrens-health-care-quality-measures/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Additionally, we expect the new reporting mandate to require vendor contract modifications in all 14 States. We expect the contract modifications would take 6 hours at
In aggregate, for States with Medicaid expansion CHIP only, we estimate an annual State burden of 7,354 hours (7,242 hr + 112 hr) at a cost of
For the 40 States (with separate CHIPs (2) and States with both Medicaid Expansion and separate CHIPs (38)) we expect a higher burden, because States with separate CHIP programs or combination CHIP programs would have to report data for children enrolled across both Medicaid and CHIP programs. We expect the Child Core Set of approximately 25 measures would take: 264.5 hours at
Additionally, we expect the new reporting mandate would require vendor contract modifications. We expect the contract modifications to take 6 hours at
In aggregate, for States with separate CHIPs and States with both Medicaid Expansion and separate CHIPs, we estimate an annual State burden of 37,800 hours (37,480 hr + 320 hr) at a cost of
The CAHPS measure is the only mandatory measure on the Child Core Set which would include a burden on beneficiaries. We estimate it would take 20 minutes (0.33 hr) at
For the 14 States with Medicaid expansion CHIP programs only, the survey will be conducted once each year. We estimate an annual per State beneficiary burden of 136 hours (0.33 hr per response x 411 beneficiary responses/State x 1 survey/yr) at a cost of
FOOTNOTE 66
States with combination CHIP programs or separate CHIP program only would conduct the survey twice each year to account for the separate Medicaid and CHIP populations. There are 40 States and territories with this program structure. We estimate an annual per State beneficiary burden of 271 hours (0.33 hr per response x 411 beneficiary responses/State x 2 surveys/yr) at a cost of
FOOTNOTE 67
For States to administer the survey, we estimate an ongoing aggregate beneficiary burden of 12,744 hours (1,904 + 10,840 hr) at a cost of
Table 4-Child Core Set Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188
Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted cost
under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) ( $ )
CFR responses (hr) (50% FMAP
or FFP)
[Sec.] 437.15-Medicaid 14 14 525.25 7,354 Varies 602,248 301,124
Expansion CHIP Programs
[Sec.] 437.15-States 40 40 945 37,800 Varies 2,956,462 1,478,231
with combination CHIP
programs or separate
CHIP programs only
Subtotal: States 54 54 Varies 45,154 Varies 3,558,710 1,779,355
[Sec.] 437.15-CAHPS 5,754 5,754 0.33 1,904 21.98 41,846 NA
survey: Medicaid
Expansion CHIP Programs
[Sec.] 437.15-CAHPS 32,880 32,880 0.33 10,840 21.98 238,280 NA
survey: States with
combination CHIP
programs or separate
CHIP programs only
Subtotal: CAHPS Survey 38,634 38,634 Varies 12,744 21.98 280,126 NA
beneficiary
Total 38,688 38,688 Varies 57,898 Varies 3,838,836 1,779,355
3. ICRs Regarding Core Set of Adult Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid (Adult Core Set) (Part 437, Subpart A)
The following changes will be submitted to OMB for their approval under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #26).
As required by the SUPPORT Act, a new subparagraph (b)(3)(B) was added to section 1139B of the Act, to make mandatory the annual reporting of behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set beginning with the annual State report on FFY 2024. As referenced in section II.A. of this final rule, mandatory reporting of the Adult Core Set will be required for all 50 States, DC,
For the behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set, consisting of approximately 13 measures, we estimate it would take: 115 hours at
FOOTNOTE 68 https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/quality-of-care/performance-measurement/adult-and-child-health-care-quality-measures/adult-health-care-quality-measures/index.html. END FOOTNOTE
Additionally, we expect the new reporting mandate would require vendor contract modifications. We expect the contract modifications to take 6 hours at
In aggregate, we estimate an annual State burden of 23,625 hours (23,193 hr + 432 hr) at a cost of
The CAHPS measure is the only mandatory measure on the Adult Core Set which would include a burden on beneficiaries. /69/ We estimate it would take 20 minutes (0.33 hr) at
FOOTNOTE 69 The
FOOTNOTE 70
Table 5-Adult Core Set Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188
Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted
under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) cost
CFR responses (hr) ( $ )
(50% FMAP or FFP)
[Sec.] 437.15-(Adult 54 States 54 437.5 23,625 Varies 1,789,599 894,800
Core Set) States
[Sec.] 437.15-CAHPS 22,194 22,194 0.33 7,344 21.98 161,406 NA
Survey (Beneficiaries)
Total 22,248 22,248 Varies 30,969 Varies 1,951,005 894,800
4. ICRs Regarding Core Sets of Health Home Quality Measures for Medicaid (Health Home Core Sets) (Part 437, Subpart A)
The following changes will be submitted to OMB for their approval under control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 #47). The burden associated with health home providers submitting data to the States is not included in this ICR as the burden estimate for the 1945 and 1945A health home programs is already included in control number 0938-1188 (CMS-10434 # 22). Including the provider burden in this estimate would be duplicative.
Sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act require health home providers to report to States on measures for determining the quality of health home services provided, as a condition for payment of such services. Sections 1945(c)(4)(B) and 1945A(g)(2) of the Act require States to report on certain health home information to the Secretary, and we rely on these authorities, as well as on section 1902(a)(6) of the Act, in proposing to require all States implementing the section 1945 or section 1945A health home benefits to report on mandatory measures in the Health Home Core Sets. Additionally, to enable this State reporting, States will be required to require their health home providers to report on these measures too, consistent with sections 1945(g) and 1945A(g)(1)(B) of the Act. As discussed in section II.A. of this final rule, State reporting of the Health Home Core Sets would be required only if the State (as defined in section 1101 for purposes of Title XIX) has an approved health home SPA under sections 1945 or 1945A of the Act. The data collection, as explained in section II.C. of this final rule, will be required to include: reporting on all mandatory measures following the reporting guidance provided by CMS; all beneficiaries served in each State's relevant health home program; and the stratification of data under certain measures by factors such as race, ethnicity, sex, age, rural/urban status, disability and language.
The burden for each respondent is dependent on the State's adoption of Health Home programs. We expect approximately 20 States to operate approximately 40 Health Home programs under section 1945 authority and approximately 10 States to operate Health Home programs under section 1945A authority.
Section 1945 Authority: The section 1945 Health Home Core Set for section 1945 programs consists of approximately 13 measures. For each respondent with this program, we estimate it would take: 52 hours at
Additionally, we expect the new reporting mandate would require vendor contract modifications. We expect the contract modifications to take 6 hours at
In aggregate, for States with a 1945 health home program, we estimate an annual burden of 5,000 hours (4,680 hr + 320 hr) at a cost of
Note that the section 1945 Health Home Core Set does not include a survey-based measure; thus, there are no burden and cost estimates associated with a survey, such as the costs of a statistician to conduct sampling and weighting for the survey.
Table 6-1945 Adult Core Set Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188
Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted
under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) cost
CFR responses (hr) ( $ )
(50% FMAP or FFP)
[Sec.] 437.15-(1945 40 40 125 5,000 Varies 570,103 285,052
Health Home Core Set)
Section 1945A Authority: We anticipate that the section 1945A Health Home Core Set for section 1945A programs would consist of approximately 7 measures. For each respondent with this program, we estimate it would take: 28 hours at
Additionally, we expect the new reporting mandate would require vendor contract modifications. We expect the contract modifications to take 6 hours at
In aggregate, for States with a 1945A health home program, we estimate an annual State burden of 700 hours (620 hr + 80 hr) at a cost of
Note that we anticipate that the section 1945A Health Home Core Set would not include a survey-based measure; thus, there are no burden and cost estimates associated with a survey, such as the costs of a statistician to conduct sampling and weighting for the survey.
Table 7-1945A Adult Core Set Requirements and Burden Under OMB Control Number 0938-1188 Regulatory section(s) Number Total Time per Total time Labor cost Total cost Adjusted cost under Title 42 of the respondents number of response (hr) ( $/hr) ( $ ) ( $ ) CFR responses (hr) (50% FMAP or FFP) [Sec.] 437.15-(1945A 10 10 70 700 Varies 80,829 40,415 Health Home Core Set)
5. ICRs Regarding Optional Request for Exemption From Mandatory Child and Adult Core Sets Reporting for Specific Populations (Child and Adult Core Sets (Part 437, Subpart A))
With the changes outlined in this final rule, the 50 States, DC,
The process to request an exemption from reporting one or more mandatory populations for the Child and Adult Core Sets will require the state to submit an exemption request to us. We estimate it would take a business operations specialist 1 hour at $80.08/hr to determine which populations the state is unable to report, a general operation manager 2 hours at $118.14/hr to draft an exemption request and 1 hour at $236.96/hr for a chief executive to review, approve, and submit the exemption request. We estimate an annual burden of 216 hours (54 States and territories x 4 hr/response) at a cost of $29,879 (54 States and territories x ([1 hr/response x $80.08/hr] + [2 hr/response x $118.14/hr]) + [1 hr/response x $236.96/hr])). Taking into account the Federal contribution to Medicaid and CHIP program administration, the estimated State share of this cost is approximately $14,940 ($29,879 x 0.50).
See table in Original Document.
C. Summary of Annual Requirements and Annual Burden Estimates
As stated in section II. of this final rule, we received 93 public comments on the proposed rule, but only one of those comments was related to the rule's collection of information requirements.
Comment: One commenter noted that in their experience with the Child and Adult Core Sets, the time to convert the reporting guidance into analytic code is underestimated in the COI (by 3-4 times) and the time to input the data is an overestimate.
Response: As the COI estimate reflects the average costs for all States that are required to comply with mandatory Core Set reporting requirements, it is expected that there will be variation in time estimates experienced by individual States. Upon additional review, we have revised the COI estimate for the Child and Adult Core Sets to reflect the issue raised by this public comment and added additional time to program, synthesize, analyze, and review the data. We are working with States to develop strategies to reduce the burden of implementing reporting guidance and for FFY 2021 reporting introduced a new reporting system to help reduce the burden of Core Set reporting. We will continue to work with States to identify best practices and strategies to further reduce this burden and incorporate this information into reporting guidance and technical assistance materials.
Table 9 sets out our annual burden estimates.
See table in Original Document.
IV. Regulatory Impact Statement
We have examined the impact of this rule as required by Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30, 1993), Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (January 18, 2011), Executive Order 14094 on Modernizing Regulatory Review (April 6, 2023), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96-354), section 1102(b) of the Act, section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104-4), Executive Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4, 1999) and Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 as amended by Executive Order 14094 defines a "significant regulatory action" as an action that is likely to result in a rule: (1) having an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more in any 1 year, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities; (2) creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising legal or policy issues for which centralized review would meaningfully further the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. OIRA has determined that this final rule is significant, and it was accordingly reviewed by OMB.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief of small entities. For purposes of the RFA, small entities include small businesses, nonprofit organizations, small pharmaceutical manufacturers participating in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, and small governmental jurisdictions. Most hospitals and most other providers and suppliers are small entities, either by nonprofit status or by having revenues of less than $8.0 million to $41.5 million in any 1 year. Individuals and States are not included in the definition of a small entity. This final rule applies to new mandatory reporting requirements for information collection from State Medicaid and CHIP agencies who do not meet the definition of a small business. Therefore, we are not preparing an analysis for the RFA because we have determined, and the Secretary certifies, that this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on any small entities. In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act requires us to prepare an RIA if a rule may have a significant impact on the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This analysis must conform to the provisions of section 604 of the RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a small rural hospital as a hospital that is located outside of a Metropolitan Statistical Area for Medicare payment regulations and has fewer than 100 beds. This proposed rule applies to State Medicaid and CHIP agencies and would not add requirements to rural hospitals or other small providers. Therefore, we are not preparing an analysis for section 1102(b) of the Act because we have determined, and the Secretary certifies, that this final rule would not have a significant impact on the operations of small rural hospitals. Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2023, that threshold is approximately $177 million. This rule would have no consequential effect on State, local, or tribal governments or on the private sector. Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an agency must meet when it issues a proposed rule (and subsequent final rule) that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has federalism implications. Since this regulation does not impose any substantial direct compliance costs on State or local governments, preempt State law, or otherwise have federalism implications, the requirements of Executive Order 13132 are not applicable. In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this regulation was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects
42 CFR Part 433
Administrative practice and procedure, Child support, Claims, Grant programs--health, Medicaid, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 CFR Part 437
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Grant programs--health, Medicaid, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 CFR Part 457
Administrative practice and procedure, Grant programs-health, Health insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the
PART 433--STATE FISCAL ADMINISTRATION
1. The authority citation for part 433 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302.
2. Amend
*****
(b) * * *
(12) The agency ensures alignment with, and incorporation of, standards and implementation specifications for health information technology adopted by the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT in 45 CFR part 170, subpart B. The agency also ensures alignment with: the HIPAA privacy, security, breach notification and enforcement regulations in 45 CFR parts 160 and 164; and the transaction standards and operating rules adopted by the Secretary under HIPAA and/or section 1104 of the Affordable Care Act. The agency meets accessibility standards established under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, or standards that provide greater accessibility for individuals with disabilities, and compliance with Federal civil rights laws; standards and protocols adopted by the Secretary under section 1561 of the Affordable Care Act; standards and protocols for reporting on the Child and Adult Core Sets as adopted by the Secretary under sections 1139A, 1139B, and 1902(a)(6) of the Act, and 42 CFR part 437 subpart A; and standards and protocols for reporting on the Health Home Core Sets as adopted by the Secretary under sections 1902(a)(6), 1945(c)(4)(B) and (g), and 1945A(g) of the Act and 42 CFR part 437 subpart A.
*****
3. Part 437 is added to read as follows:
PART 437--MEDICAID QUALITY
Subpart A--Child, Adult, and Health Home Health Care Quality Measures
Sec.
437.1Basis, scope, purpose, and applicability.
437.5Definitions.
437.10Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets.
437.15Annual reporting on the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets.
437.20State plan requirements.
Subpart B [Reserved]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1320b-9a, 42 U.S.C. 1320b-9b, 42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(6), 42 U.S.C. 1396w-4, and 42 U.S.C. 1396w-4a.
Subpart A--Child, Adult, and Health Home Health Care Quality Measures
(a) Statutory basis. This subpart is based on sections 1139A, 1139B, 1902(a)(6), 1945(c)(4)(B), 1945(g), and 1945A(g) of the Act.
(b) Scope. This subpart sets forth specifications for issuance and updates to the Core Set of Children's Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid and CHIP (Child Core Set), the Core Set of Adult Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid (Adult Core Set), and the 1945 and 1945A Core Sets of Health Home Quality Measures for Medicaid (Health Home Core Sets) by the Secretary. It also sets forth requirements related to annual reporting by States of measures in all of the Core Sets, and requirements related to provider reporting to States on the Health Home Core Sets.
(c) Purpose. (1) The purpose of the Medicaid and CHIP Child Core Set and the Medicaid Adult Core Set is to measure the overall national quality of care for beneficiaries, monitor performance at the State-level, and improve the quality of health care.
(2) The purpose of the Health Home Core Sets is to measure the overall program quality of health home services for Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled in a health home program under section 1945 or 1945A of the Act, monitor the impact of these two optional State plan benefits, monitor performance of these two benefits at the program level, and improve the quality of health care.
(d) Applicability. The provisions of this subpart apply as follows:
(1) For the Child and Adult Core Sets, State includes the 50 States, the
(2) For the Health Home Core Sets, State includes any State (as defined under section 1101 of the Act for purposes of Title XIX of the Act) with an approved Medicaid Health Home State Plan Amendment under section 1945 or 1945A of the Act.
(e) Applicability dates. States must comply with the requirements of this subpart by no later than State reporting on the 2024 Core Sets, which must be submitted and certified by December 31, 2024.
As used in this subpart--
1945 Health Home Core Set means the Core Set of Health Home Quality Measures related to the Medicaid health home benefit under section 1945 of the Act, established and updated annually as described in
1945A Health Home Core Set means the Core Set of Health Home Quality Measures related to the Medicaid health home benefit under section 1945A of the Act, established and updated annually as described in
Adult Core Set means the Core Set of Adult Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid established and updated annually as described in
Attribution rules means the process Medicaid and CHIP and other payers use to assign beneficiaries to a specific health care program or delivery system for the purpose of calculating the measures on the Core Sets.
Behavioral health means a beneficiary's whole emotional and mental well-being, which includes, but is not limited to, the prevention, treatment, and recovery of mental disorders including substance use disorders.
Behavioral health measure means a quality measure that could be used to evaluate the quality of and improve the health care provided to beneficiaries with, or at-risk for a behavioral health disorder(s).
Child Core Set means the Core Set of Health Care Quality Measures for Children in Medicaid and CHIP, established and updated annually as described in
Core Sets means the Child Core Set, the Adult Core Set, the section 1945 Health Home Core Set, and the section 1945A Health Home Core Set, collectively.
Health Home Core Sets means, collectively, the two Core Sets of Health Home Quality Measures related to the two Medicaid health home benefits under sections 1945 and 1945A of the Act, established and updated annually as described in
Standardized format means the format provided by the reporting system that States are required to utilize to submit Core Sets data to CMS.
(a) The Secretary shall--
(1) Identify, and annually update, the quality measures to be included in the Child, Adult, and Health Home Core Sets; and update the Child and Adult Core Sets beginning no later than January 1, 2024 and annually no later than January 1 thereafter.
(2) Consult annually with States and other interested parties identified in paragraph (e) of this section to--
(i) Establish priorities for the development and advancement of the Core Sets;
(ii) Identify any gaps in the measures included in the Core Sets;
(iii) Identify measures which should be removed as they no longer strengthen the Core Sets; and
(iv) Ensure that all measures included in the Core Sets reflect an evidence-based process including testing, validation, and consensus among interested parties; are meaningful for States; and are feasible for State-level and/or Health Home program level reporting, as appropriate.
(3) In consultation with States, develop and update annually the reporting guidance described in paragraph (b) of this section.
(4) Not later than September 30, 2025 and annually by September 30 thereafter, collect, analyze, and make publicly available the information reported by States on the Child and Adult Core Sets as described in
(5) Annually, collect, analyze, and make publicly available the information reported by States on the Health Home Core Sets as described in
(b) Annual reporting guidance will include all of the following:
(1) Identification of all measures in all the Core Sets, including:
(i) Measures newly added and measures removed from the prior year's Core Sets;
(ii) Measures included in the Adult Core Set that are identified as behavioral health measures;
(iii) The specific measures for which reporting is mandatory for the Child, Adult, and 1945 and 1945A Health Home Core Sets;
(iv) The measures for which the Secretary will complete reporting on behalf of States and the measures for which States may elect to have the Secretary report on their behalf; and
(v) The frequency of reporting for survey-based measures, which will be no more frequent than annually.
(2) Guidance to States on how to collect and calculate the data on the Core Sets.
(3) Standardized format for reporting measure data required under this subpart.
(4) Procedures that State agencies must follow in reporting measure data required under this subpart.
(5) Identification of the populations for which States may, but are not required to, report the Child and Adult Core Set measures identified by the Secretary under paragraph (b)(1) of this section for a specific year in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
(i) Additionally, CMS will include guidance to States on how to request a 1-year exemption from reporting one or more Child and/or Adult Core Set measures for specific populations in accordance with
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) Attribution rules for determining how States must report on measures for beneficiaries who are included in more than one population, during the reporting period.
(7) The subset of measures within the measures in the Child Core Set, among the behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set, and among the measures in the Health Home Core Sets that must be stratified by race, ethnicity, sex, age, rural/urban status, disability, language, or such other factors as may be specified by the Secretary and informed by annual consultation with States and interested parties in accordance with paragraphs (a)(2) and (d) of this section.
(c) In issuing the guidance described in paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretary may provide that Child and Adult Core Sets reporting for certain populations of beneficiaries described in paragraph (b)(5) of this section will be voluntary for a specific year, considering the level of difficulty in accessing the data required for such Child and Adult Core Sets State reporting.
(d) In specifying which measures, and by which factors, States must report stratified measures consistent with paragraph (b)(7) of this section, the Secretary will consider whether stratification can be accomplished based on valid statistical methods and without risking a violation of beneficiary privacy and, for measures obtained from surveys, whether the original survey instrument collects the variables necessary to stratify the measures, and such other factors as the Secretary determines appropriate; the Secretary will require stratification of 25 percent of the measures on each of the Core Sets (the Child Core Set, behavioral health measures within the Adult Core Set, and Health Home Core Sets) for which the Secretary has specified that reporting should be stratified by the second year of annual reporting after the effective date of these regulations, 50 percent of such measures for the third and fourth years of annual reporting after the effective date of these regulations, and 100 percent of measures beginning in the fifth year of annual reporting after the effective date of these regulations.
(e) For purposes of paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the Secretary must consult with interested parties as described in this paragraph to include the following:
(1) States;
(2) Pediatricians, children's hospitals, and other primary and specialized pediatric health care professionals (including members of the allied health professions) who specialize in the care and treatment of children and adolescents, particularly children with special physical, mental, and developmental health care needs;
(3) Dental professionals, including pediatric dental professionals;
(4) Health care providers that furnish primary health care to children and families who live in urban and rural medically underserved communities or who are members of distinct population sub-groups at heightened risk for poor health outcomes;
(5) National organizations representing children and/or adolescents, including children with disabilities and children with chronic conditions;
(6) National organizations representing consumers and purchasers of children's health care;
(7) National organizations and individuals with expertise in pediatric health quality measurement;
(8) Voluntary consensus standards setting organizations and other organizations involved in the advancement of evidence-based measures of health care;
(9) With respect only to guidance on the Health Home Core Sets, providers of health home services under sections 1945 and 1945A of the Act;
(10) Such other interested parties as the Secretary may determine appropriate.
(a) General rules. (1) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(4) of this section, the agency--
(i) Must report by December 31, 2024, on all measures on the 2024 Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set;
(ii) In subsequent years, must report annually, by December 31st, on all measures on the Child Core Set and the behavioral health measures in the Adult Core Set that are identified by the Secretary pursuant to
(iii) Must report annually, by December 31st, on all measures in the 1945 or 1945A Health Home Core Sets (as applicable) that are identified by the Secretary pursuant to
(iv) May report on all other measures in the Adult Core Set that are not described in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(2) Measures identified per
(3) The agency must adhere to the reporting guidance described in
(4) In reporting on all Child and Adult Core Set measures, the agency is required to report on all Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries, including those enrolled in fee-for-service and managed care, unless--
(i) The Secretary specifies in annual guidance that the population is not required to be reported in accordance with
(ii) The Secretary grants the agency an exemption from reporting one or more Child and Adult Core Set measures for a specific population in accordance with paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(5) In reporting on all 1945 and 1945A Health Home Core Sets measures, the agency is required to report on all beneficiaries enrolled in an approved health home program.
(6)(i) The agency may request a 1-year exemption from reporting for a specific population defined by the State for one or more Child and/or Adult Core Set measures if the agency demonstrates that it:
(A) Is unable to obtain access to data required to report the relevant Child and Adult Core Set measure or measures for that population despite making reasonable efforts to do so; and
(B) Has a reasonable timeline of actions underway to resolve data access problems.
(ii) The agency must submit a request for an exemption by September 1st of the applicable reporting year.
(iii) If the Secretary determines that the agency satisfies the conditions set forth in paragraph (6)(i) of this section, the Secretary will approve the exemption only for that year's Child and/or Adult Core Set reporting and the exemption will apply only for the specific population for which the State requests an exemption. If the Secretary determines that the agency does not satisfy the conditions set forth in paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this section, the Secretary will communicate a denial of the exemption request to the agency, and the agency will be expected to include the relevant population in that year's Child and Adult Core Sets reporting.
(iv) The agency may request an exemption to reporting Child and Adult Core Set measures for the same population in accordance with this paragraph in more than one reporting year.
(b) Reporting of Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries. In States that have implemented a separate child health program ("separate CHIP") under part 457 of this chapter:
(1) The agency must report, in accordance with attribution rules established by the Secretary pursuant to
(i) The Medicaid beneficiaries (including those for whom the State claims Federal financial participation under both Title XIX and Title XXI) in the age range to which the measure applies, as per reporting guidance described in paragraph
(ii) The beneficiaries in the State's separate CHIP in the age range to which the measure applies, as per reporting guidance described in paragraph
(2) If the separate CHIP elects to report on Adult Core Set measures for individuals enrolled in their separate CHIP, the agency must report on individuals described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(a) The State plan must specify that:
(1) The agency will report on the Child and Adult Core Sets in accordance with
(2) If health home services are covered under the State plan pursuant to section 1945 or 1945A of the Act, the agency will report on the applicable Health Home Core Set or Sets in accordance with
(3) If health home services are covered under the State plan pursuant to section 1945 or 1945A of the Act, the agency requires health home services providers to report to the agency on all populations served by the health home providers and on the measures in the applicable Health Home Core Set or Sets that are identified by the Secretary pursuant to
(b) [Reserved]
PART 457--ALLOTMENTS AND GRANTS TO STATES
4. The authority citation for part 457 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302.
5. Amend
a. In paragraph (a)(2) removing the word "and" at the end of the paragraph;
b. In paragraph (a)(3) by removing the period at the end of the paragraph and replacing it with "; and"; and
c. Adding paragraph (a)(4).
The addition reads as follows:
*****
(a) * * *
(4) Section 1139A and 1139B of the Act, which set forth the requirements for child and adult health quality measures and reporting.
*****
6. Add
(a) Reporting the Child Core Set. The State must report on the Core Set of Health Care Quality Measures for Children in Medicaid and CHIP (Child Core Set) for a separate child health program in accordance with part 437 of this chapter.
(b) Reporting the Adult Core Set. The State may elect to report on the Core Set of Adult Health Care Quality Measures in Medicaid (Adult Core Set) established by the Secretary in accordance with part 437 of this chapter. If the State reports measures on the Adult Core Set, such reporting must be in accordance with part 437 of this chapter, except that reporting on behavioral health measures on the Adult Core Set is not mandatory.
(c) Reporting of Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries. The State must report measures included in the Child Core Set and, if applicable, Adult Core Set for individuals enrolled in a separate CHIP separately from individuals enrolled in Medicaid in accordance with
Secretary, Department of
[FR Doc. 2023-18669 Filed 8-28-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
GW University Experts: Homeowners Insurance & Climate Change
Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company; Notice of Filing of Advance Notice To Raise Prefunded Liquidity Resources Through the Periodic Issuance and Private Placement of Senior Notes
Advisor News
- Social Security Fairness Act increases need for financial advice
- It’s a new year: How will you reinvigorate your client service?
- Trump should impose China tariffs, prioritize renewing tax cuts and immigration reform
- Fewer report having retirement savings than a year ago
- Paul Brahim becomes 2025 FPA president
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Reinsurance Group of America, Incorporated and Subsidiaries
- Life insurance and annuity sales: What’s ahead for 2025?
- Ares Management Raises Over $2.3 Billion of Equity Commitments to Support the Long-Term Growth of Aspida
- Salt Financial Annuity Index analytics report for 2024
- Ibexis Life & Annuity Insurance Company® Launches WealthDefender™ Fixed Index Annuity Series
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- North Dakota lawmakers to consider bill capping price of insulin
- Americans’ rage at insurers goes beyond health coverage
- Community roots, expanding horizons: MountainOne Insurance's decade of growth and commitment
- HCA-CMC deal could lead to higher costs
- EDITORIAL: Permanent relief from medical debt is needed
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Reinsurance Group of America, Incorporated and Subsidiaries
- Life insurance and annuity sales: What’s ahead for 2025?
- Investor overview presentation
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Etiqa General Insurance Berhad
- UnitedHealth ordered to pay $165M for deceiving costumers
More Life Insurance News