Monday, December 17, 2012

Kewa Workgroup meeting notes 12/14/2012


 

 

Discussion topics

UNM expansion hospital

Letter from Greg Ortiz urging Tribal Leadership to get involved in advocating for the construction of the Proposed Adult Hospital

·         Will not impose any new Taxes or mill levy for Bernalillo County residents and will help honor the UNM 1952 contract agreement with Pueblos.

·         Construction was halted after opposition in NM Legislature and Bernalillo County commissioners

 

Dismantling of the DOH office of Native American Health

Dr. Ron Reid Director of ONAH requests assistance in raising awareness of the unilateral dissolution of the Office of Native American Health, by the DoH Secretary prior to her resignation, without any Tribal consultation.

·         This is another example of the State of NM (Executive) unilaterally making decisions about Tribal Programs without consulting tribes.

 

Tribal Consultation follow up:

·         Identified the major points of contention between the Tribes and the State.

1.      Complete Lack of Meaningful Tribal Consultation between the State of NM and Tribes

2.      Mandatory Enrollment of All Native Americans in to Managed Care Organizations (MCO) Through the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) Native Americans are protected being mandatorily enrolled into Managed Care Programs

3.      Elimination of the “Opt in” ability for Eligible enrolled Native Americans in the Medicaid Program Native Americans have had this option since the institution of the Salud Program in NM and many other Tribes in other states including tribes in AZ and Kansas have similar provisions in their states Medicaid program

4.      Elimination of the Fee for Service Component from the Medicaid program for Native American Population. The fee for service program is utilized and preferred by Tribal Programs and IHS when billing for Medicaid Services, because of prompt payments.  The Fee for service program is going to remain intact for undocumented immigrants in the State of NM

5.      Elimination of the Prior Quarter Coverage “presumptive eligibility” for Medicaid Enrollment. The elimination of this provision will greatly affect Tribal health program and IHS budgets that rely Medicaid reimbursements.

6.      Any individual Native American enrollee cost sharing or Tribal program/facility cost Sharing.  Native Americans are protected from cost sharing through provisions in the ARRA, PPACA and the IHCIA

 

           

·         talked about dialogue between the State and CMS after the Consultation- State is unwilling to alter Waiver after being presented with the Tribes issues brought up at the session and unwilling to sit back down with Tribes to discuss tribal concerns with the waivers contents

1.      After the November 27th meeting with Tribes CMS reps called the State and presented HSD with the Tribes Demands Per IHS and CLP:

 

“Admiral Grinnell and Navajo VP Jim met with Cindy Mann last week, apparently the state received our demands from the consultation on the 27th and has indicated that they don’t plan to meet with tribes again and will not back down from their proposal. No timelines yet relative to a decision.

Rumors started swirling about the approval dates for the waiver and RFP after I informed the Con Alma health policy forum December 30th about the consultation on the 27th and CMS’ plans to meet with tribes again during the first week of January. Apparently, MCO’s and state contractors in attendance got nervous about their paydays and asked the state during the LFC hearing last week. Secretary Squier insisted that everything is on track and that they had been mis-informed. I spoke to our CMS Project Officer Robert Nelb today and he confirmed the following;

a. CMS is working on scheduling a call with the group from the 27th for the first week of January

b. No final decision will be made on the waiver before this call/meeting occurs.

c. The state could go ahead and grant the contracts on January 7th anyway, but they will have to be amended if any part of the waiver isn’t approved.”

 

·         Next consultation with CMS will be Conference call in first week of Jan 2013,  this is a major concern with the group because the proposed call is expected to be the 6th  or 7th of January 2013, as you all know new leadership will just be taking office and will be expected to participate in this CMS Call!?  We as a workgroup need to do two things, contact CMS and ask for a later date and educated incoming leadership as to the situation with the State and CMS

need to educate new leaders/councils

 

Medicaid Expansion

Small good news Governor Martinez is leaning more towards accepting Exchange as part of a “bargin” to get the exchange passed her way. CLP reported after having a one on one conversation with Governor Martinez

 

NMHIX

·         There isn’t much to report on the exchange other than the Blue print was transmitted to CMS on Friday December 16th

·         It was pointed out that NA while will be able to take advantage on the Exchange we are protected for the Mandate to purchase Insurance

·         The NA workgroup of the HIX is talking about what the Native American Service Center is suppose to be its function and role within the Exchange

 

Action Items:

 

Obtain resolutions from AIPC on Medicaid Expansion and Centennial Care from Ken Lucero

 

One pager on Centennial Care for Leadership

 

Five to Six pages on Centennial Care for Tribal Councils Health Departments/workers

 

Letter from Governor Magdalena to other Governors urging involvement in educating incoming leadership on Centennial Care

 

Need bullet points to April on focus of letter ie. major points/ concerns for your pueblo

 

Form a small Group to go to each Tribe (if need be) to Educate Leadership and Councils so that we have a unified voice when speaking to State and CMS

(Erik April volunteer so far)

 

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

NM HSD responses to Kewa Questions on Centennial Care








CMS Clarification on Medicaid Expansion

On December 10 CMS released a FAQ on Exchanges Market Reforms and Medicaid, Governor Martinez had asked in a letter whether NM could limit FPL eligibility or phase in Expansion implementation. 




26. Can a state expand to less than 133% of FPL and still receive 100% federal matching funds?
A. No. Congress directed that the enhanced matching rate be used to expand coverage to 133% of FPL. The law does not provide for a phased-in or partial expansion. As such, we will not consider partial expansions for populations eligible for the 100 percent matching rate in 2014 through 2016. If a state that declines to expand coverage to 133% of FPL would like to propose a demonstration that includes a partial expansion, we would consider such a proposal to the extent that it furthers the purposes of the program, subject to the regular federal matching rate. For the newly eligible adults, states will have flexibility under the statute to provide benefits benchmarked to commercial plans and they can design different benefit packages for different populations. We also intend to propose further changes related to cost sharing.
In 2017, when the 100% federal funding is slightly reduced, further demonstration opportunities will become available to states under State Innovation Waivers with respect to the Exchanges, and the law contemplates that such demonstrations may be coupled with section 1115 Medicaid demonstrations. This demonstration authority offers states significant flexibility while ensuring the same level of coverage, affordability, and comprehensive coverage at no additional costs for the federal government. We will consider section 1115 Medicaid demonstrations, with the enhanced federal matching rates, in the context of these overall system demonstrations.

Friday, December 7, 2012

Secretary Sebelius' remarks at today's White House Tribal

Secretary Sebelius' remarks at today's White House Tribal 
> Nations Conference
> 
> White House Tribal Nations Conference
> 
> December 5, 2012
> Washington, DC
> 
> Good Morning.  The Department of Health and Human Services is proud  
> to be partners with you in working to open new doors of opportunity  
> across Indian Country.
> 
> During a recent visit to Tribal communities in South Dakota, I saw  
> some great examples of our work together.
> 
> At Sinte Gleska University on the Rosebud Sioux Indian reservation,  
> I met young people served by a unique children’s mental health  
> program that blends Western and traditional Lakota cultural  
> approaches to healing.
> 
> I met students at the Red Cloud Indian School on the Pine Ridge  
> Indian reservation where the Administration is supporting a Lakota  
> Language Program which teaches the Lakota traditions through a rich  
> K-12 curriculum.
> 
> And I met community members who had begun to eat healthier and  
> increase their physical activity with support from the Special  
> Diabetes Program for Indians.
> 
> There are rich partnerships like these all across Indian Country.  
> And they are giving more First Americans reason to feel hope for  
> the future instead of despair.
> 
> To be sure, we face incredibly persistent challenges today: high  
> unemployment, energy costs, suicide, chronic disease and federal  
> resources stretched thin.
> 
> But I also know that smart investment has allowed us to make real  
> progress. Programs like those I visited in South Dakota were made  
> possible by a strong collaboration between tribes and the Obama  
> Administration.
> 
> They are also part of something bigger happening across Indian  
> Country.
> 
> When President Obama took office, he recognized that we needed more  
> than a series of individual success stories. We needed a  
> comprehensive approach. And if you look back over the last 4 years,  
> you can begin to see what that has meant for Indian Country.
> 
> Four years ago, the Indian Health Service had a budget of $3.8  
> billion. Today, it’s 29 percent larger at $4.3 billion.
> 
> Four years ago, the Contract Health Service budget was $579  
> million.  In most places, IHS could fund only life or limb  
> referrals. Today, the Contract Health Service budget is $843  
> million, a 46 percent increase that has allowed many more patients  
> to get the referrals they need.
> 
> And it’s not just the budget.
> 
> Four years ago, the reauthorization of the Indian Health Care  
> Improvement Act was hopelessly stuck in Congress. Today, after more  
> than a decade of trying, it has been permanently authorized. The  
> Indian Health Service is here to stay.  The law also means that  
> Tribes can get coverage for their employees through the Federal  
> Employees Health Benefits Program.  More than 10,000 are already  
> enrolled.
> 
> And by approving every single Tribal Facility for the National  
> Health Service Corps, we’re bringing more providers to communities  
> in need. As you know this is a program that says to doctors,  
> nurses, and dentists: “If you go practice in an underserved  
> community, we’ll give you a scholarship or help pay your loans.”  
> Four years ago, because of the complicated certification process,  
> fewer than 60 IHS and Tribal facilities were eligible for Corps  
> members. Today, there are 587.
> 
> I am also proud to say that after close consultation with Tribes,  
> the VA and IHS will announce a national agreement tomorrow for the  
> VA to reimburse IHS for the direct care it provides veterans. This  
> agreement includes the outpatient all-inclusive rate that Tribes  
> preferred. Implementation will begin soon at federal sites. This  
> agreement will make it easier for tribes to enter their own  
> agreements with VA for the health services they provide.
> 
> Now at HHS, the well-being of the American Indian and Alaska Native  
> people is a priority that extends beyond the Indian Health Service  
> to reach every operating division and program office.  We recognize  
> that giving people the opportunity to thrive requires more than  
> just access to quality care. It is also comes from investing in  
> whole families and strong communities.
> 
> Four years ago, American Indian and Alaska Natives in the foster  
> care, and child welfare system had to go through large state  
> programs and outside groups. Today, we have created a process for  
> tribes to operate their own Title IV-E programs. The Port Gamble  
> S’Klallam [ SKLAW-lam] Tribe was the first. And right now we  
> continue to process additional agreements with other tribes.
> 
> Four years ago, we were seeing a steady decline in the number of  
> children in Head Start who spoke a tribal language at home. Today,  
> we’re using Head Start’s new performance standards to begin  
> integrating tribal language and culture into their classrooms and  
> curricula.
> 
> Four years ago, tribal nations were largely on their own in the  
> ceaseless fight against alcohol and substance abuse. Today, our  
> department has a dedicated office working with tribes as they  
> develop detailed action plans and coordinate resources from across  
> the federal government.
> 
> All of this progress is built on a strong foundation of  
> consultation. And we’ve made progress here too.
> 
> Four years ago, HHS had an outdated consultation policy on its  
> books. Today with your guidance it has been updated, and 7 agencies  
> within the Department have their own new or updated consultation  
> policies. Our new Department-wide policy calls for us to regularly  
> evaluate our progress. So we recently sent each of you a letter  
> asking for your input. And I look forward to your perspective.
> 
> Four years ago, our Department’s leadership was receiving irregular  
> updates about its work in Indian Country -- often only when there  
> was a crisis to solve. Today, our senior leaders and I meet  
> regularly with the Secretary’s Tribal Advisory Committee or STAC --  
> the first cabinet level committee of its kind.  And we have charged  
> the STAC not only with addressing today’s biggest problems but also  
> with making the most of tomorrow’s opportunities.
> 
> One of the biggest of those opportunities is our ongoing work to  
> implement the Affordable Care Act. We need your help to make sure  
> people are taking advantage of the law which includes many  
> important benefits for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
> 
> It puts in place new rules prohibiting insurers from imposing  
> lifetime dollar limits on your benefits. Young adults who would  
> otherwise be uninsured, can now stay on their parents insurance  
> until they turn 26.  And key preventive services like diabetes  
> screening and mammograms, now cost nothing out of pocket for most  
> people in private plans and elders on Medicare.
> 
> In 2014, more of Indian Country’s most vulnerable may be covered by  
> Medicaid. States will receive federal funding assistance to extend  
> their programs to uninsured adults with incomes below 133 percent  
> of the Federal Poverty Level. That’s about $15,000 a year for an  
> individual and $31,000 for a family of four.
> 
> At the same time, new competitive insurance marketplaces will allow  
> hundreds of thousands of American Indians and Alaska Natives to  
> purchase quality, affordable health coverage for the first time.
> 
> But we need your partnership to educate tribal communities about  
> the law’s new benefits and protections -- and to identify everyone  
> who is eligible and help them enroll.
> 
> And together, we need to hold our partners in the states  
> accountable. Last year, I wrote a letter to Governors reiterating  
> my full commitment to strong government-to-government relationships  
> with Tribes. And I will continue to remind states that they must  
> consider Tribes full partners during the design and implementation  
> of any programs that use HHS funds.
> 
> Looking back, it’s clear that we are in a much better place today  
> than we were 4 years ago. But the time is now to look forward.
> 
> The journey ahead will not be easy. But it is possible to envision  
> an Indian Country 4 years from now where everyone has access to the  
> quality care they need to get healthy and stay well; where more  
> children have the chance to follow her dreams; and where every  
> community can protect its culture and traditions while creating new  
> opportunities for work and growth.
> 
> We can fulfill that great promise by continuing our work together.  
> We have made great progress, but we have much more work to do. And  
> this Administration is committed to working hand-in-hand with you  
> to improve lives for the better in Indian Country.

NMICoA Health Committee commentary to CMS

NMICoA Health Committee
Commentary to CMS
Re: Centennial Care, Medicaid Expansion, Health Insurance Exchange

The New Mexico Indian Council on Aging (NMICoA) Health Committee was developed in 2009 by its late President, Archie Chavez of Sandia Pueblo, in response to  the institution of the Coordination of Long Term Services (CoLTS) Program by the State of New Mexico (NM).  This program during its development phase did not seek Tribal input or consult with tribes in any proactive fashion.  The State of NM Human Services Department (HSD) felt that contracting with Managed Care Organizations (MCO) would vastly improve access to care and diminish disparities in Native American Elder Populations enrolled in NM’s Medicaid program.

The Health Committee has had meetings with HSD since November 2008 and presented issues and concerns to HSD, Aging and Long Term Services (ALTS) and the Indian Affairs Department (IAD) Secretaries, and the Health Committee has noted that Pueblo seniors enrolled in the CoLTS program still have problems accessing services such as Transportation personal care and respite care because providers are mostly off-reservation and cannot bring services to many rural pueblo communities.  We feel more community based Services should be provided via the network of Pueblo senior Centers and MCO’s would upgrade accessibility and services to Pueblo elders and disabled members.
The Health Committee recommends
  1. Acceptance of a true Government-to-Government relationship between Tribes/Pueblos/Nations with the Federal and State Governments
  2. Tribal/Pueblo/Nations Sovereignty be fully recognized and accepted by NM State Government and the US Government
  3. The Federal obligation be maintained in maintaining Health care programs and funding for Tribes/Pueblos/and nations in NM.
  4. NM HSD needs to be transparent in development of its medicaid 1115 Waiver plan with active interaction, consultation, input from Tribes/Pueblos/Nations
  5. NM HSD has also not provided adequate outreach and Tribal involvement in developing its  Health insurance exchange until very recently.  NM HSD has not developed the proposed special, office of Indian outreach and education with any discussion or input from Tribes and Tribal Health organizations.
  6. The health committee also recommends Medicaid Expansion for Indian people on and off reservation this program need full information outreach to Tribes/Pueblo/Nations explain the benefits and access to care that will be improved for this population.  The Health Committee understands the 100% Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP), and 138% Federal Poverty Level (FPL) will improve insurabillity of up to 25,000 more American Indian.  The Government of NM has not committed to approving the Medicaid  Expansion in NM and this decision should also be from Tribal Governments on behalf of this very vulnerable population.
  7. The health committee is in discussion with current Pueblo leaders and will continue to evaluate better practice models to long term care fro Pueblo seniors and disabled members to improve clinical behavior and social services for this population in need of these services.

Respectfully submitted,

Florence Chavez, Pueblo of Sandia
Vice President NMICoA
Manuel Cristobal, Pueblo of Santa Ana
Pueblo Councilman, NMICoA Health Committee Member
Joe Cherino, Pueblo of Taos
NMICoA Health Committee member
Kay Ray, Pueblo of Laguna
President Elders Association, NMICoA Health Committee Member
Leonard Armijo, Pueblo of Santa Ana
Pueblo Councilman, NMICoA Health Committee member
Eloise Smith, Pueblo of Laguna
NMICoA Health Committee member
Robin Clemens, Pueblo of Acoma
Senior Center Director, NMICoA Health Committee member
Ron Lujan, Pueblo of Taos
NMICoA Health Committee member

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Native American HIX work group rescheduled

The meeting scheduled for Dec. 4th has been changed toDecember 18th, 1:30 – 4:00 and will again be at:
Albuquerque Area
Indian Health Service
5300 Homestead Road, NE
Albuquerque, NM 87110
 
 
 

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Center on Law and Poverty view on Tribal Consultation with CMS

Notes from The Center on Law and Poverty who attended the session.
 
 
 
Hi everyone,
 
This Tuesday, CMS held a daylong, face-to-face consultation with tribal, pueblo, and IHS leadership at the Albuquerque USDA offices about Centennial Care. Kitty Marx and Robert Nelb (NM Project Officer) were present from the Baltimore office, and Suzette Seng and others were present from the Dallas office. The meeting was facilitated by Ken Lucero from the AIPC. After a long caucus (spurned by a motion by Jemez, Kewa and my own meddling), leadership presented the following unanimous, non-negotiable list of demands to CMS:
 
1.       No mandatory enrollment of Native Americans in managed care
2.       Retention of the fee-for-service option for Native Americans regardless of where they obtain services
3.       No elimination of retroactive coverage
 
With the permission of Cindy Mann, Kitty Marx stated that they will present the list to HSD at a meeting already scheduled for December 17th, and will meet with tribal leadership again by phone on January 7th. When asked, Kitty confirmed that the state will not have a decision on the waiver by December 31st, and that they will not be able to award any MCO contracts until a final decision on the waiver and the contracts has been made by CMS. Kitty stressed that the state’s deadline has no authority.
 
So, thanks to some very hard work on the part of tribal advocates, we might still win!
 
I’ve attached the following  handouts from the meeting:
1.       CMS’ October questions to HSD about the waiver (non-public and incomplete)
2.       CMS’ power point presentation about the Centennial Care waiver
3.       HSD’s amusing tale of a day in the life of a Native American enrolled in Centennial Care submitted to CMS
4.       CMS’ model addendum for tribal health providers to incorporate in their contracts with Qualified Health Plans (this is more relevant to the Exchange than Medicaid, but could be incorporated into Centennial Care MCO contracts as well)


Good stuff!
 
Q
 
Quela Robinson
Staff Attorney
New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty

Pueblo of Acoma Position Paper for CMS Tribal Consultation 11/27/2012





Tribal consultation with CMS November 27,2012


Quick Summary

                                                                   

CMS -             Kitty Marx, Robert Nelb,  

IHS-     Richie Grinnell,

Tribes in attendance:

Ohkay Owingeh, Kewa, Zia, Isleta, Taos, Santa Clara, Santa Ana, Acoma, Cotichi, Laguna, Nambe, Zuni, Ramah (Navajo), Jicarllia Apache, Ute (Southern)

After introductions of Federal representatives and Tribal Leaders and representatives, CMS gave an over view of Centennial Care as they understand it, given the information from the NM HSD. A power point hand out was provided ( for a copy of the materials presented contact Robert Nelb Robert.nelb@cms.hhs.gov)  no new information was presented that hasn’t already been identified in the Centennial Care Waiver as submitted on August 17, 2012.

After the presentation by CMS Tribal Leaders voiced their concerns and many had the common message.  As is, with relation to Tribes, we oppose NM s 1115 Research and Demonstration Medicaid Waiver “Centennial Care” for the following reasons:

·         Complete Lack of Meaningful Tribal Consultation between the State of NM and Tribes.

·         Mandatory Enrollment of All Native Americans in to Managed Care Organizations (MCO)

            Through the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA) Native Americans are protected being mandatorily enrolled into Managed Care Programs

·         Elimination of the “Opt in” ability for Eligible enrolled Native Americans in the Medicaid Program

            Native Americans have had this option since the institution of the Salud Program in NM   

            And many other Tribes in other states including tribes in AZ and Kansas have similar         provisions in their states Medicaid program

·         Elimination of the Fee for Service Component from the Medicaid program for Native American Population

            The fee for service program is utilized and preferred by Tribal Programs and IHS when    billing for Medicaid Services, because of prompt payments.  The Fee for service program   is going to remain intact for undocumented immigrants in the State of NM

·         Elimination of the Prior Quarter Coverage “presumptive eligibility” for Medicaid Enrollment

            The elimination of this provision will greatly affect Tribal health program and IHS   budgets that rely Medicaid reimbursements.

·         Any individual Native American enrollee cost sharing or Tribal program/facility cost Sharing Native Americans are protected from cost sharing through provisions in the PPACA and the IHCIA

Other topics included MCO RFP approval/disapproval, MCO relations, MCO RFP Timeline, Contracting, direct reimbursement to Tribes from HHS/CMS, Outreach, care coordination, Tribal Health data( Health outcomes, disparities) Tribal Sovereignty.

 

After the Lunch Break CMS asked Tribal Leaders for specific details of the Waiver they would be willing to discuss.  The Tribes elected to Caucus independent of the audience and government representatives.

It was decided that,

·         The Tribes oppose the Centennial Care Waiver as it is currently written and submitted, though not the entire document there are portions and provision within the waiver that the Tribes agree on.

·         The issues stated above are the points of contention, unless the Waiver is altered to include these points NM Tribes (present at the Consultation Session) ask CMS to disapprove of the Waiver on behalf of the NM Tribes.

·         Tribes are willing to discuss Details of the waiver but not at this time due to the main points above and time constraints, CMS agreed and are open to many more consultations sessions.

·         Tribes present agree that the Waiver has many flaws and would like to see it stopped but it is not the job of the tribes to “fix” the Waiver for the State. The Waiver will have a negative effect on rural NM communities, but Tribes cannot make a  decision for the non-Tribal population of NM  

CMS did extend an invitation to any tribal leader attending the Tribal celebration in Washington DC, on December 6, 2012 to meet with Cindy Mann Director of CMS, who will be the person with the final say in the approval of the Waiver.

CMS will be meeting with NM HSD personnel on December 17, in Baltimore MD, to discuss the Waiver and this tribal consultation.                                                                                                     

Monday, November 26, 2012

Daily news post "CMS Officials Offer Hints On DSH, Medicaid Phase-In Policies"

CMS Officials Offer Hints On DSH, Medicaid Phase-In Policies

Posted: September 13, 2012
CMS Medicaid chief Cindy Mann on Thursday (Sept. 13) strongly suggested that the administration does not intend to allow states to expand their Medicaid population to levels below the 138 percent threshold in the health reform law, at least for the first three years during which the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost for newly eligible beneficiaries. Mann also affirmed that CMS was in the process of drafting a proposed rule on another key issue related to the Medicaid expansion -- if the agency would consider a state's decision on expansion when determining reductions to the disproportionate share hospital payments -- but she gave no indication of where the agency would land. Another Medicaid official, however, said at a separate event that the agency was leaning toward not treating states differently on DSH reductions regardless of the whether a state chooses to expand its Medicaid program.
CMS' Jennifer Ryan made the comments on the DSH payments during an America's Health Insurance Plans panel. Mann was speaking to stakeholders on a teleconference, the first in a planned monthly series that aims to update stakeholders on CMS policy on the health reform law's Medicaid expansion.
A state Medicaid source says it is not surprising that CMS would lean toward not treating states differently on the DSH payments as to do otherwise would essentially “reward” states for not taking up the expansion.
It seems that what the law provides for is that states expand their programs to cover all people up to 133 percent of the Federal Poverty Level, Mann said in response to a stakeholder's query. CMS has not issued guidance on states' ability to phase-in to that level, she said. Mann further gave no indication that CMS planned to offer more information, instead suggesting that the agency believes it has already answered such queries.
CMS has said that a state can come in when it chooses, and “at least in the short term” this would address questions about a phase in, Mann said. Essentially, states would have time to analyze participation in the program and other issues “long before being required to put up state dollars,” she said.
Although she did not specifically say so, her answer may suggest that CMS could re-evaluate the issue in later years when the 100 percent matching rate no longer applies.
The state Medicaid source also says that Mann was likely implying that the agency will not allow the phase-in or partial expansion, but is balking at coming right out and saying so as it's a political decision.
States can start late and states can end early, unless Congress chooses to enact another “maintenance of effort” provision, says the source. But the question of whether states can elect to cover a population up to 100 percent of the federal poverty level, either as a final decision or on the path toward the 138 percent threshold, remains unresolved, the source says, adding, “I think she's implying the answer will be “no,” but (CMS officials) haven't actually said it yet.”
The source also takes umbrage with Mann's assertion that the law provides for states to expand to 138 percent of the poverty level, as a possible reason why states should go all or nothing.
That provision, the source points out, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
“The road forward is unprecedented and unclear,” the source says. “The ultimate decision will be a political one.” --Amy Lotven (alotven@iwpnews.com)



David MachledtDescription: cid:EDCF02C1-6293-43C8-BE8C-0DDE8286C087
Policy Analyst
National Health Law Program

Letter to HHS Sec. Sebelius on HIX

November 20, 2012
Dear Secretary Sebelius:
I write urging you to issue guidancerequiring states to expand Medicaid to thefull extent outlined in the Affordable Care Act (for states that choose to expand), and not allow partial expansions (e.g., only to 100% FPL, leaving those 101% to 133% to purchase insurance on the state Exchanges). As an organization that represents Health Care for the Homeless grantees (HCHs, a special populations segment of the HRSA-funded Health Center program that serves individuals experiencing homelessness) and other homeless health care providers, we believe the Medicaid expansion is one of the most important aspects of the law. Of the 825,295 patients seen at HCHs in 2011, 62% were uninsured, yet 90% were under 100% FPL. Our goal is not only to improve the health of those without housing, but to prevent and end homelessness itself. The expansion of Medicaid to non-disabled adults without dependent children is not only a critical financial resource for health centers such as HCHs, but also a vital lifeline for those very vulnerable adults we serve.
We are greatly concerned that states will be doing a disservice to an impoverished population and to the very systems they are now creating by threatening to only partially expand Medicaid eligibility to those earning less than or equal to 100% FPL. If states are able to establish eligibility to less than 100% FPL, it leaves one portion of their citizenry ineligible for any health insurance options (through Medicaid or the Exchanges). Expanding to only 100% FPL takes away consumer choice, leaving no other option but the private market plans offered on the Exchange. Please consider the following four points as you craft upcoming guidance to States:
Consumers should choose, not governments. The ACA purposefully allowed an overlap between Medicaid eligibility and the state exchanges for those earning between 100% and 133% FPL, specifically to allow greater consumer choice for a transitional population. The ACA did not intend for governments to make this choice for all consumers, thereby cutting off a key option allowed to them under federal law. HHS can protect consumer choice by ensuring that low-income patients in this income group are able to make their own determinations for their health care home—either in Medicaid or in a private plan purchased on the Exchange.
Consistency across all states is important. There will be enough issues related to individuals “churning” between Medicaid and the Exchanges at the 133% FPL income mark without adding an additional “churn” point as they move across state lines in pursuit of work, health insurance or other life opportunities. Having a consistent eligibility across all states was clearly the ACA’s intention, and states should not be introducing further fragmentation, which only adds to the collective state administrative burdens, confusion among beneficiaries, and reduced ability to compare costs and health outcomes across all states. The ACA was intended to simplify and streamline health insurance—breaking down the very complexities that result from multiple eligibility levels. Allowing all states to set their own, widely varying thresholds works against this goal.
Those earning 100-133% FPL are better off under Medicaid. Lower income individuals generally have greater health care needs and poorer health. The Medicaid program works more effectively for this population specifically because it protects them against the higher out of pocket costs (e.g., premiums, co-pays and deductibles) that will characterize the private plans offered on the Exchange. For an individual, the 100-133% income range translates to $11,170 to $14,856 (roughly $5.40 to $7.00 per hour at a full-time job—not even minimum wage). This level of income is far from adequate to afford stable housing and otherwise provide for independent living. This is still a fragile group and should not be left vulnerable to the additional costs involved with the Exchange (which, even if subsidized, will still amount to 2% of gross income). While all states will vary in their essential health benefit packages, Medicaid has traditionally offered a more comprehensive service structure compared to individual and small group private plans (now to be offered on the Exchange). Individuals and families work hard to rise out of poverty and they deserve not to be undermined by having a crucial safety net program removed at a critical time. Medicaid plans will serve this group better than the Exchanges.
Adding the 100-133% FPL population may harm state-based Exchanges. Because those in the lower income groups generally have poorer health, their care is anticipated to be more expensive. The Congressional Budget Office’s July 2012 analysis indicates that costs in the state Exchanges will be 2% higher for this reason. In turn, this jeopardizes the financial stability of the Exchange as a whole (creating a “sick pool”), possibly spreading costs of a sicker population across those at higher income levels, thus creating a disincentive for broader Exchange participation. Hence, in the interests of also protecting the viability of state-based Exchanges, we believe this income group is better served by the Medicaid program.

As Chair of the Interagency Council on Homelessness, you understand and address the connections between poor health and homelessness. We are proud that you have been a champion of the ACA as well as Opening Doors—and we hope that you can consider the rationale above when issuing guidance to states. We hope that HHS prohibits states from only partially expanding Medicaid (for those thatchoose to expand at all). If you or your staff would be interested in talking further about issues related to homelessness and the health needs of this population, please don’t hesitate to contact me at jlozier@nhchc.org or at 615‑226‑2292.
Sincerely,
Description: John Lozier copy
John N. Lozier, MSSW
Executive Director
cc: CindyMann, CMS/CMCS
Vikki Wachino, CMS/OA/CMCS/FCHPG
Anne Marie Costello, CMCS/FCHPG/DEB
Don Moulds, Ph.D., ASPE
Mary Wakefield, HRSA
Jim Macrae, HRSA/BPHC
Barbara Poppe, USICH