Archive for Medicaid regulations

 

MACPAC Meets

The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission met for two days last week in Washington, D.C.

The following is MACPAC’s own summary of the sessions.

MACPAC kicked off its April meeting with a review of a draft chapter for the June 2021 report to Congress and recommendations on addressing high-cost specialty drugs. Since 2017, the Commission has been working to identify potential models that could help states address the challenges of high prices. The presentation focused on drugs that have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the accelerated approval pathway. Such approvals are based on whether the drug has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a clinical benefit; however, unlike under the traditional pathway, the clinical benefit has yet to be verified.

On Friday, the Commission voted to approve two recommendations* that address Medicaid payment for such drugs. The recommendations would increase the rebates under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program on accelerated approval drugs until these drugs have verified the clinical benefit. Once the FDA converts the drugs to traditional approval, the rebates would revert back to the standard amounts.

Commissioners then turned their attention to ways states

Medicaid Work Requirements on the Way Out?

Medicaid work requirements appear to be going away in the wake of the Supreme Court agreeing to a Biden administration request to postpone arguments in a case brought by the Trump administration seeking to reverse previous court rulings blocking implementation of such requirements.

To date, 12 states have received federal approval to implement Medicaid work requirements although only one such effort, in Arkansas, ever got off the ground.  All of the efforts eventually stalled in the face of legal challenges and administrative obstacles.  Upon taking office, the Biden administration informed the 12 states that it was considering withdrawing their approvals to proceed, and now, the Justice Department has told the Supreme Court that the administration will be reversing the approvals and asked the court not to hear arguments to enable those states to proceed.  As a result, the Supreme Court canceled oral arguments for the case that were scheduled for later this month.

Learn more about the latest development in the long-running effort to introduce Medicaid work requirements – and the almost-as-long campaign to prevent such requirements – in the Healthcare Dive article “SCOTUS drops Medicaid work requirement arguments at Biden administration’s request.”…

Administration to Review Public Charge Rule

President Biden has ordered a review of the federal public charge rule.

The controversial rule, which would limit immigration to the U.S. for people who might at some point become dependent on public aid programs, has been the subject of litigation since it was proposed in 2019.

The White House executive order directs

…the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of other relevant agencies, as appropriate…[to] review all agency actions related to implementation of the public charge ground of inadmissibility…

The officials were ordered to report their findings to the president within 60 days.

The public charge rule authorizes the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to deny a green card to any immigrant who receives certain public benefits – such as food stamps, public housing vouchers, welfare, or Medicaid – for more than 12 months within any three-year period.  The expressed purpose of the rule is to deny green cards to individuals who may become dependent on publicly funded services – a so-called “public charge.”

Health care advocates feared the rule would discourage some immigrants to whom the rule does not even apply from seeking to participate in certain public aid programs and …

MACPAC Meets

The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission met for two days last week in Washington, D.C.

The following is MACPAC’s own summary of the sessions.

The October 2020 MACPAC meeting opened with a panel discussion on restarting Medicaid eligibility redeterminations when the public health emergency ends.  It included Jennifer Wagner, director of Medicaid eligibility and enrollment at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; René Mollow, deputy director for health care benefits and eligibility at the California Department of Health Care Services; and Lee Guice, director of policy and operations at the Department for Medicaid Services, Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services.

After a break, Commissioners heard a panel discussion with Kevin Prindiville, executive director at Justice in Aging; Mark Miller, executive vice president of healthcare at Arnold Ventures; and Charlene Frizzera, senior advisor at Leavitt Partners, on creating a new program for dually eligible beneficiaries. Later, staff presented preliminary findings from a mandated report on non-emergency medical transportation. The day concluded with a report on nursing facility acuity adjustment methods.

On Friday, the day began with a session on access to mental health services for adults in Medicaid. It was followed by a related panel discussion on

MFAR is Dead

At least for now.

The controversial Medicaid Fiscal Accountability Regulation, slated for implementation this fall over the objections of many health care stakeholders, will not move forward at this time.

In a tweet earlier this week, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma wrote that

We’ve listened closely to concerns that have been raised by our state and provider partners about potential unintended consequences of the proposed rule, which require further study.  Therefore, CMS is withdrawing the rule from the regulatory agenda.

If implemented, opponents maintained, the regulation would have:

  • Deprived states of important, established policy-making prerogatives.
  • Created major new administrative burdens for state governments and hospitals.
  • Inappropriately regulated financing of the state share of Medicaid spending.
  • Introduced new, unspecified standards for state Medicaid programs.

While CMS maintained that MFAR would have enhanced the transparency of state Medicaid programs, the rule’s opponents maintained that it could lead to a major reduction of resources for serving the Medicaid population.

It is worth noting that in “withdrawing the rule from the regulatory agenda,” Verma did not preclude the possibility of reintroducing MFAR at some point in the future.

Learn more from article “Trump administration backing off Medicaid rule that