Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of Disapproval of Indiana State Plan Amendment 02-021, 1719-1721 [05-445]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2005 / Notices
Dated: December 29, 2004.
Alvin Hall,
Director, Management Analysis and Services
Office, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05–410 Filed 1–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of
Disapproval of Indiana State Plan
Amendment 02–021
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice of hearing.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces an
administrative hearing to be held on
January 20, 2005, at 10 a.m., 233 North
Michigan Avenue, Minnesota Room,
Chicago, Illinois 60601 to reconsider the
decision to disapprove Indiana State
Plan Amendment (SPA) 02–021.
Closing Date: Requests to participate
in the hearing as a party must be
received by the presiding officer by
January 25, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen Scully-Hayes, Presiding
Officer, CMS, LB–23–20, Lord Baltimore
Drive, Baltimore, Maryland 21244,
Telephone: (410) 786–2055.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice announces an administrative
hearing to reconsider the decision to
disapprove Indiana Medicaid State Plan
Amendment (SPA) 02–021, which was
submitted on December 27, 2002.
In SPA 02–021, Indiana proposed to
expand the State’s Medicaid mental
health rehabilitation benefit to include
services furnished by five types of child
care facilities to inpatients in the
facilities. The State incorporated into
the SPA portions of the Indiana State
code (470 IAC 3–11, 470 IAC 3–12, 470
IAC 3–13, 470 IAC 3–14, and 470 IAC
3–15) that govern the operation of these
facilities.
At issue in this reconsideration is
whether SPA 02–021 is consistent with
the requirements contained in sections
1902(a)(10), 1902(a)(19), 1902(a)(30)(A),
and 1902(a)(4) of the Social Security Act
(the Act) as described in more detail
below. In general, the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
found that the SPA had four basic
problems: (1) The proposed services
would be provided to individuals under
age 65 who are patients in institutions
for mental diseases (IMDs) (that are not
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:09 Jan 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
juvenile psychiatric hospitals) and who
have not been determined eligible for
Medicaid; (2) the proposed services
would be provided on order of
individuals who are neither physicians
nor licensed practitioners; (3) the
proposed services would be provided in
facilities which permit use of
mechanical restraints and provide for
seclusion of children and which,
therefore, cannot be considered to be
‘‘in the best interests’’ of the recipients;
and (4) the proposed payment
methodology includes items not
encompassed in the definition of
Medicaid rehabilitation services and
improperly includes payment for state
administrative costs.
More specifically, at issue is whether
the proposed SPA complies with the
requirements of section 1902(a)(10) of
the Act, which provides generally that
state plans must make ‘‘medical
assistance’’ as defined in section 1905(a)
of the Act, available to eligible
individuals. The definition of medical
assistance at section 1905(a)(27),
excludes payment for care and services
for individuals under age 65 who are
patients in institutions for mental
diseases (IMDs), except payment for
juvenile psychiatric hospital services
pursuant to section 1905(a)(16) of the
Act. Indiana proposed to furnish
services to individuals who are under
age 65 in institutions that appear to
meet the definition of an IMD at section
1905(i) of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations at 42 CFR 435.1009.
However, these facilities do not provide
services that meet the definition of
inpatient psychiatric hospital services
contained in section 1905(h) of the Act
and do not comply with the regulatory
requirements for providers of inpatient
psychiatric hospital services set forth at
42 CFR 483 Subpart G (concerning use
of restraint or seclusion). Thus, the State
has failed to establish that the services
are within the scope of medical
assistance that is authorized under the
Act.
In addition, section 1905(a)(13) of the
Act defines rehabilitative services as
those that are recommended by a
physician or other licensed practitioner
of the healing arts. The proposed SPA
would include services that are
recommended by individuals who are
neither physicians nor licensed
practitioners, but who are operating
under the supervision of these
individuals. Nor do the proposed
services meet the requirements or
services in any inpatient setting within
the scope of medical assistance
(hospitals, nursing facilities, psychiatric
hospital services for juveniles, or
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1719
intermediate care facilities for the
mentally retarded).
Finally, section 1905(a) of the Act
defines the term ‘‘medical assistance’’ as
payment of part or all of the cost of care
and services furnished to eligible
individuals. The reimbursement section
of this amendment, detailed at section
4.2.2 of the Indiana Residential Care
Reimbursement Rate Establishment
document, and included in Attachment
4.19B of this amendment, would
provide payment for services furnished
to individuals who have not been
determined eligible for Medicaid.
In addition, at issue is whether the
proposed SPA is consistent with the
requirement in section 1902(a)(19) of
the Act that services be provided ‘‘in the
best interests of the recipients.’’ Indiana
permits the use of mechanical restraints
and provides for extended periods of
seclusion of children in the facilities
covered by this amendment. CMS has
determined that these policies, defined
in the Indiana Administrative Code (470
IAC 3–11, 470 IAC 3–12, and 470 IAC
3–13) and incorporated in this
amendment by reference, would
endanger the health and welfare of the
victims of these procedures, and cannot
be considered to be in the best interests
of the children affected.
Finally, at issue is whether the
proposed payment methodology
complies with section 1902(a)(30)(A) of
the Act, which requires that payments
for services under the plan be
‘‘consistent with efficiency, economy,
and quality of care,’’ and with section
1902(a)(4) which requires that the State
use methods of administration that are
found by the Secretary to be ‘‘necessary
for the proper and efficient operation of
the plan.’’ The payment methodology
proposed by the State includes payment
for numerous cost items, including
elements of room and board and
transportation services, that are not
encompassed in the definition of
Medicaid rehabilitation services. For
this reason, CMS found that the State
has not documented that the proposed
payment methodology would be
efficient or economical, as required by
section 1902(a)(30)(A) of the Act.
Furthermore, CMS determined that the
payment methodology improperly
includes payment for State
administrative costs as medical
assistance. The amendment would
include Medicaid administrative costs
as part of the payment to providers and
thus would likely result in incorrect
payment of FFP. Because the proposed
payment methodology commingles
medical assistance and administrative
costs, it is not consistent with the
requirement for proper and efficient
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
1720
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2005 / Notices
plan administration contained in
section 1902(a)(4) of the Act. Therefore,
based on the reasoning set forth above,
and after consultation with the
Secretary as required under 42 CFR
430.15(c)(2), CMS disapproved Indiana
SPA 02–021.
Section 1116 of the Act and 42 CFR
Part 430 establish Department
procedures that provide an
administrative hearing for
reconsideration of a disapproval of a
state plan or plan amendment. CMS is
required to publish a copy of the notice
to a state Medicaid agency that informs
the agency of the time and place of the
hearing and the issues to be considered.
If we subsequently notify the agency of
additional issues that will be considered
at the hearing, we will also publish that
notice.
Any individual or group that wants to
participate in the hearing as a party
must petition the presiding officer
within 15 days after publication of this
notice, in accordance with the
requirements contained at 42 CFR
430.76(b)(2). Any interested person or
organization that wants to participate as
amicus curiae must petition the
presiding officer before the hearing
begins in accordance with the
requirements contained at 42 CFR
430.76(c). If the hearing is later
rescheduled, the presiding officer will
notify all participants.
The notice to Indiana announcing an
administrative hearing to reconsider the
disapproval of its SPA reads as follows:
Ms. Melanie Bella, Assistant Secretary,
Medicaid Policy, 402 West Washington
Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
Dear Ms. Bella: I am responding to your
request for reconsideration of the decision to
disapprove Indiana Medicaid State Plan
Amendment (SPA) 02–021 submitted on
December 27, 2002.
In SPA 02–021, Indiana proposed to
expand the State’s Medicaid mental health
rehabilitation benefit to include services
furnished by five types of child care facilities
to inpatients in the facilities. The State
incorporated into the SPA portions of the
Indiana State code (470 IAC 3–11, 470 IAC
3–12, 470 IAC 3–13, 470 IAC 3–14, and 470
IAC 3–15) that govern the operation of these
facilities.
We do not find the proposed SPA to be
consistent with section 1902(a) of the Social
Security Act (the Act), which provides
generally that state plans must make
‘‘medical assistance,’’ as defined in section
1905(a) of the Act, available to eligible
individuals. The proposed SPA would
provide a facility-based benefit that within
the scope of ‘‘medical assistance’’ as that
term is used in section 1902(a) of the Act and
defined in section 1905(a) of the Act. The
definition of medical assistance at section
1905(a) of the Act excludes payment for care
and services to individuals under age 65 who
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:09 Jan 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
are patients in institutions for mental
diseases (IMDs), except payment for juvenile
psychiatric hospital services pursuant to
section 1905(a)(16) of the Act. The services
proposed under this SPA would be furnished
to individuals who are under age 65 in
institutions that appear to meet the definition
of an IMD at section 1905(i) of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations at 42 CFR
435.1009. (In responses to Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
inquiries, the State itself indicated that the
facilities can have over 16 beds, and that the
patients reside in the facility in order to
receive treatment for mental illness.) But, the
proposed services are not within the scope of
juvenile psychiatric hospital services which,
pursuant to section 1905(h) of the Act,
includes services provided to individuals
under age 21 in psychiatric residential
treatment facilities. It appears that the
proposed services would be furnished in
facilities that do not meet the regulatory
requirements for providers of inpatient
psychiatric hospital services set forth at 42
CFR 483 Subpart G (concerning use of
restraint or seclusion). Thus, CMS does not
find that the State has established that the
services are within the scope of medical
assistance that is authorized under the Act.
Even if the State were to demonstrate that
the individuals were not inpatients in IMDs,
CMS does not believe the State has
demonstrated that the proposed services are
within the proper scope of medical
assistance. The proposed services do not
meet the requirement under section
1905(a)(13) of the Act that rehabilitation
services be recommended by a physician or
other licensed practitioner of the healing arts.
The proposed SPA would include services
that are recommended by individuals who
are neither physicians nor licensed
practitioners, but who are operating under
the supervision of these individuals. Nor has
the State shown that the proposed services
meet the requirements for any inpatient
setting within the scope of medical
assistance, including hospitals, nursing
facilities, psychiatric hospital services for
juveniles, or intermediate care facilities for
the mentally retarded.
In addition, the proposed SPA, does not
appear to be consistent with the requirement
in section 1902(a)(19) of the Act that services
be provided ‘‘in the best interests of the
recipients.’’ Indiana permits the use of
mechanical restraints and provides for
extended periods of seclusion of children in
the facilities covered by this amendment.
CMS believes that these policies, defined in
the Indiana Administrative Code (470 IAC 3–
11, 470 IAC 3–12, and 470 IAC 3–13) and
incorporated in this amendment by reference,
would endanger the health and welfare of the
victims of these procedures, and cannot be
considered to be in the best interests of the
children affected.
CMS found that the State has not
demonstrated that the proposed payment
methodology would comply with section
1902(a)(30)(A) of the Act, which requires that
payments for services under the plan be
‘‘consistent with efficiency, economy, and
quality of care.’’ The payment methodology
proposed by the State includes payment for
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
numerous cost items, including elements of
room and board and transportation services,
that are not encompassed in the definition of
Medicaid rehabilitation services. For this
reason, CMS found that the State has not
documented that the proposed payment
methodology would be efficient or
economical.
Furthermore, the proposed payment
methodology does not appear to comply with
the requirement for methods of
administration that are found by the
Secretary to be ‘‘proper and efficient’’ for the
operation of the State plan, because the
payment methodology improperly includes
payment for State administrative costs as
medical assistance. Section 1903(a) of the Act
provides for FFP for medical assistance at the
Federal medical assistance percentage rate,
which is currently 62.32 percent in Indiana.
Section 1903(a) of the Act provides for FFP
at the 50 percent match rate for activities that
have been found to be in support of the
proper and efficient administration of the
state plan. The amendment would include
Medicaid administrative costs as part of the
payment to providers and thus would likely
result in incorrect payment of FFP. Because
the proposed payment methodology
commingles medical assistance and
administrative costs, CMS finds that the
payment methodology is not consistent with
the requirement for proper and efficient plan
administration.
Equally important, section 1905(a) of the
Act defines the term ‘‘medical assistance’’ as
payment of part or all of the cost of care and
services furnished to eligible individuals.
The reimbursement section of this
amendment, detailed at section 4.2.2 of the
Indiana Residential Care Reimbursement
Rate Establishment document, and included
in Attachment 4.19B of this amendment,
would appear to provide payment for
services furnished to individuals who have
not been determined eligible for Medicaid.
Based on the reasoning set forth above, and
after consulting with the Secretary as
required by 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS
disapproved Indiana Medicaid SPA 02–021.
I am scheduling a hearing on your request
for reconsideration to be held January 20,
2005, at 10:00 a.m., 233 North Michigan
Avenue, Minnesota Room, Chicago, Illinois
60601 to reconsider the decision to
disapprove Indiana SPA 02–021.
If this date is not acceptable, we would be
glad to set another date that is mutually
agreeable to the parties. The hearing will be
governed by the procedures prescribed at 42
CFR, part 430.
I am designating Ms. Kathleen ScullyHayes as the presiding officer. If these
arrangements present any problems, please
contact the presiding officer. In order to
facilitate any communication which may be
necessary between the parties to the hearing,
please notify the presiding officer to indicate
acceptability of the hearing date that has
been scheduled and provide names of the
individuals who will represent the State at
the hearing. The presiding officer may be
reached at (410) 786–2055.
Sincerely,
Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 6 / Monday, January 10, 2005 / Notices
Section 1116 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1316); 42 CFR 430.18.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 13.714, Medicaid Assistance
Program)
Dated: January 5, 2005.
Mark B. McClellan,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 05–445 Filed 1–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–03–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Pediatric Advisory Committee; Notice
of Meeting
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
This notice announces a forthcoming
meeting of a public advisory committee
of the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). The meeting will be open to the
public.
Name of Committee: Pediatric
Advisory Committee.
General Function of the Committee:
To provide advice and
recommendations to the agency on
FDA’s regulatory issues. The committee
also advises and makes
recommendations to the Secretary of
Health and Human Services under 45
CFR 46.407 on research involving
children as subjects that is conducted or
supported by the Department of Health
and Human Services, when that
research is also regulated by FDA.
Date and Time: The meeting will be
held on February 14, 2005, from 2 p.m.
to 6 p.m. and on February 15, 2005,
from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Location: Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research Advisory Committee
Conference Room, rm. 1066, 5630
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD.
Contact Person: Jan N. Johannessen,
Office of Science and Health
Coordination of the Office of the
Commissioner (HF–33), Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, (for
express delivery, rm. 14C–06) Rockville,
MD 20857, 301–827–6687, e-mail:
jjohannessen@fda.gov, or FDA Advisory
Committee Information Line, 1–800–
741–8138 (301–443–0572 in the
Washington, DC area), code
8732310001. Please call the Information
Line for up-to-date information on this
meeting.
Agenda: On Monday, February 14,
2005, the committee will discuss an
agency report on Adverse Event
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:09 Jan 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
Reporting, as mandated in Section 17 of
the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children
Act (BPCA), for LOTENSIN (benazepril),
BREVIBLOC (esmolol), MALARONE
(atovaquone/proguanil), VIRACEPT
(nelfinavir), XENICAL (orlistat), and
GLUCOVANCE (glyburide/metformin).
The committee will also be asked to
advise the agency on how to improve
the process and content of the adverse
event reviews and reporting as
mandated by BPCA.
On Tuesday, February 15, 2005, the
committee will discuss risk evaluation,
labeling, risk communication, and
dissemination of information on
potential cancer risk among pediatric
patients treated for atopic dermatitis
with topical dermatological
immunosuppressants.
The background material will become
available no later than the day before
the meeting and will be posted under
the Pediatric Advisory Committee (PAC)
docket Web site at https://www.fda.gov/
ohrms/dockets/ac/acmenu.htm (click on
the year 2005 and scroll down to PAC
meetings).
Procedure: Interested persons may
present data, information, or views,
orally or in writing, on issues pending
before the committee. Written
submissions may be made to the contact
person by February 7, 2005. Oral
presentations from the public will be
scheduled on Monday, February 14,
2005, between approximately 4 p.m.
and 4:30 p.m. and on Tuesday, February
15, 2005, between approximately 12
noon and 12:30 p.m. Time allotted for
each presentation may be limited. Those
desiring to make formal oral
presentations should notify the contact
person by February 7, 2005, and submit
a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to
present, the names and addresses of
proposed participants, and an
indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation.
Persons attending FDA’s advisory
committee meetings are advised that the
agency is not responsible for providing
access to electrical outlets.
FDA welcomes the attendance of the
public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to
accommodate persons with physical
disabilities or special needs. If you
require special accommodations due to
a disability, please notify Jan
Johannessen at least 7 days in advance
of the meeting.
Notice of this meeting is given under
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2).
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1721
Dated: December 30, 2004.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. 05–382 Filed 1–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 2000P–1378]
Guidance for Industry: Labeling for
Topically Applied Cosmetic Products
Containing Alpha Hydroxy Acids as
Ingredients; Availability
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a guidance document
entitled ‘‘Guidance for Industry:
Labeling for Topically Applied
Cosmetic Products Containing Alpha
Hydroxy Acids as Ingredients.’’ The
guidance recommends content for a
labeling statement for cosmetic products
containing alpha hydroxy acids (AHAs)
as ingredients. This action was
prompted by a citizen petition filed by
the Cosmetic, Toiletry, and Fragrance
Association, which requested that FDA
issue a regulation establishing labeling
requirements relating to sun protection
with use of cosmetic products
containing AHAs.
DATES: You may submit written or
electronic comments on the guidance
document at any time.
ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for
single copies of the guidance document
to the Office of Cosmetics and Colors,
Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition (HFS–100), Food and Drug
Administration, 5100 Paint Branch
Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740–3835.
Include a self-addressed adhesive label
to assist that office in processing your
request or include a fax number to
which the guidance document may be
sent.
Submit written comments on the
guidance document to the Division of
Dockets Management (HFA–305), 5630
Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD
20852. Submit electronic comments to
https://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments.
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for electronic access to the
guidance document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie
N. Barrows, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition (HFS–125), Food and
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1719-1721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-445]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Notice of Hearing: Reconsideration of Disapproval of Indiana
State Plan Amendment 02-021
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice of hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces an administrative hearing to be held on
January 20, 2005, at 10 a.m., 233 North Michigan Avenue, Minnesota
Room, Chicago, Illinois 60601 to reconsider the decision to disapprove
Indiana State Plan Amendment (SPA) 02-021.
Closing Date: Requests to participate in the hearing as a party
must be received by the presiding officer by January 25, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scully-Hayes, Presiding
Officer, CMS, LB-23-20, Lord Baltimore Drive, Baltimore, Maryland
21244, Telephone: (410) 786-2055.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces an administrative
hearing to reconsider the decision to disapprove Indiana Medicaid State
Plan Amendment (SPA) 02-021, which was submitted on December 27, 2002.
In SPA 02-021, Indiana proposed to expand the State's Medicaid
mental health rehabilitation benefit to include services furnished by
five types of child care facilities to inpatients in the facilities.
The State incorporated into the SPA portions of the Indiana State code
(470 IAC 3-11, 470 IAC 3-12, 470 IAC 3-13, 470 IAC 3-14, and 470 IAC 3-
15) that govern the operation of these facilities.
At issue in this reconsideration is whether SPA 02-021 is
consistent with the requirements contained in sections 1902(a)(10),
1902(a)(19), 1902(a)(30)(A), and 1902(a)(4) of the Social Security Act
(the Act) as described in more detail below. In general, the Centers
for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) found that the SPA had four
basic problems: (1) The proposed services would be provided to
individuals under age 65 who are patients in institutions for mental
diseases (IMDs) (that are not juvenile psychiatric hospitals) and who
have not been determined eligible for Medicaid; (2) the proposed
services would be provided on order of individuals who are neither
physicians nor licensed practitioners; (3) the proposed services would
be provided in facilities which permit use of mechanical restraints and
provide for seclusion of children and which, therefore, cannot be
considered to be ``in the best interests'' of the recipients; and (4)
the proposed payment methodology includes items not encompassed in the
definition of Medicaid rehabilitation services and improperly includes
payment for state administrative costs.
More specifically, at issue is whether the proposed SPA complies
with the requirements of section 1902(a)(10) of the Act, which provides
generally that state plans must make ``medical assistance'' as defined
in section 1905(a) of the Act, available to eligible individuals. The
definition of medical assistance at section 1905(a)(27), excludes
payment for care and services for individuals under age 65 who are
patients in institutions for mental diseases (IMDs), except payment for
juvenile psychiatric hospital services pursuant to section 1905(a)(16)
of the Act. Indiana proposed to furnish services to individuals who are
under age 65 in institutions that appear to meet the definition of an
IMD at section 1905(i) of the Act and applicable Federal regulations at
42 CFR 435.1009. However, these facilities do not provide services that
meet the definition of inpatient psychiatric hospital services
contained in section 1905(h) of the Act and do not comply with the
regulatory requirements for providers of inpatient psychiatric hospital
services set forth at 42 CFR 483 Subpart G (concerning use of restraint
or seclusion). Thus, the State has failed to establish that the
services are within the scope of medical assistance that is authorized
under the Act.
In addition, section 1905(a)(13) of the Act defines rehabilitative
services as those that are recommended by a physician or other licensed
practitioner of the healing arts. The proposed SPA would include
services that are recommended by individuals who are neither physicians
nor licensed practitioners, but who are operating under the supervision
of these individuals. Nor do the proposed services meet the
requirements or services in any inpatient setting within the scope of
medical assistance (hospitals, nursing facilities, psychiatric hospital
services for juveniles, or intermediate care facilities for the
mentally retarded).
Finally, section 1905(a) of the Act defines the term ``medical
assistance'' as payment of part or all of the cost of care and services
furnished to eligible individuals. The reimbursement section of this
amendment, detailed at section 4.2.2 of the Indiana Residential Care
Reimbursement Rate Establishment document, and included in Attachment
4.19B of this amendment, would provide payment for services furnished
to individuals who have not been determined eligible for Medicaid.
In addition, at issue is whether the proposed SPA is consistent
with the requirement in section 1902(a)(19) of the Act that services be
provided ``in the best interests of the recipients.'' Indiana permits
the use of mechanical restraints and provides for extended periods of
seclusion of children in the facilities covered by this amendment. CMS
has determined that these policies, defined in the Indiana
Administrative Code (470 IAC 3-11, 470 IAC 3-12, and 470 IAC 3-13) and
incorporated in this amendment by reference, would endanger the health
and welfare of the victims of these procedures, and cannot be
considered to be in the best interests of the children affected.
Finally, at issue is whether the proposed payment methodology
complies with section 1902(a)(30)(A) of the Act, which requires that
payments for services under the plan be ``consistent with efficiency,
economy, and quality of care,'' and with section 1902(a)(4) which
requires that the State use methods of administration that are found by
the Secretary to be ``necessary for the proper and efficient operation
of the plan.'' The payment methodology proposed by the State includes
payment for numerous cost items, including elements of room and board
and transportation services, that are not encompassed in the definition
of Medicaid rehabilitation services. For this reason, CMS found that
the State has not documented that the proposed payment methodology
would be efficient or economical, as required by section 1902(a)(30)(A)
of the Act. Furthermore, CMS determined that the payment methodology
improperly includes payment for State administrative costs as medical
assistance. The amendment would include Medicaid administrative costs
as part of the payment to providers and thus would likely result in
incorrect payment of FFP. Because the proposed payment methodology
commingles medical assistance and administrative costs, it is not
consistent with the requirement for proper and efficient
[[Page 1720]]
plan administration contained in section 1902(a)(4) of the Act.
Therefore, based on the reasoning set forth above, and after
consultation with the Secretary as required under 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2),
CMS disapproved Indiana SPA 02-021.
Section 1116 of the Act and 42 CFR Part 430 establish Department
procedures that provide an administrative hearing for reconsideration
of a disapproval of a state plan or plan amendment. CMS is required to
publish a copy of the notice to a state Medicaid agency that informs
the agency of the time and place of the hearing and the issues to be
considered. If we subsequently notify the agency of additional issues
that will be considered at the hearing, we will also publish that
notice.
Any individual or group that wants to participate in the hearing as
a party must petition the presiding officer within 15 days after
publication of this notice, in accordance with the requirements
contained at 42 CFR 430.76(b)(2). Any interested person or organization
that wants to participate as amicus curiae must petition the presiding
officer before the hearing begins in accordance with the requirements
contained at 42 CFR 430.76(c). If the hearing is later rescheduled, the
presiding officer will notify all participants.
The notice to Indiana announcing an administrative hearing to
reconsider the disapproval of its SPA reads as follows:
Ms. Melanie Bella, Assistant Secretary, Medicaid Policy, 402 West
Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
Dear Ms. Bella: I am responding to your request for
reconsideration of the decision to disapprove Indiana Medicaid State
Plan Amendment (SPA) 02-021 submitted on December 27, 2002.
In SPA 02-021, Indiana proposed to expand the State's Medicaid
mental health rehabilitation benefit to include services furnished
by five types of child care facilities to inpatients in the
facilities. The State incorporated into the SPA portions of the
Indiana State code (470 IAC 3-11, 470 IAC 3-12, 470 IAC 3-13, 470
IAC 3-14, and 470 IAC 3-15) that govern the operation of these
facilities.
We do not find the proposed SPA to be consistent with section
1902(a) of the Social Security Act (the Act), which provides
generally that state plans must make ``medical assistance,'' as
defined in section 1905(a) of the Act, available to eligible
individuals. The proposed SPA would provide a facility-based benefit
that within the scope of ``medical assistance'' as that term is used
in section 1902(a) of the Act and defined in section 1905(a) of the
Act. The definition of medical assistance at section 1905(a) of the
Act excludes payment for care and services to individuals under age
65 who are patients in institutions for mental diseases (IMDs),
except payment for juvenile psychiatric hospital services pursuant
to section 1905(a)(16) of the Act. The services proposed under this
SPA would be furnished to individuals who are under age 65 in
institutions that appear to meet the definition of an IMD at section
1905(i) of the Act and applicable Federal regulations at 42 CFR
435.1009. (In responses to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
(CMS) inquiries, the State itself indicated that the facilities can
have over 16 beds, and that the patients reside in the facility in
order to receive treatment for mental illness.) But, the proposed
services are not within the scope of juvenile psychiatric hospital
services which, pursuant to section 1905(h) of the Act, includes
services provided to individuals under age 21 in psychiatric
residential treatment facilities. It appears that the proposed
services would be furnished in facilities that do not meet the
regulatory requirements for providers of inpatient psychiatric
hospital services set forth at 42 CFR 483 Subpart G (concerning use
of restraint or seclusion). Thus, CMS does not find that the State
has established that the services are within the scope of medical
assistance that is authorized under the Act.
Even if the State were to demonstrate that the individuals were
not inpatients in IMDs, CMS does not believe the State has
demonstrated that the proposed services are within the proper scope
of medical assistance. The proposed services do not meet the
requirement under section 1905(a)(13) of the Act that rehabilitation
services be recommended by a physician or other licensed
practitioner of the healing arts. The proposed SPA would include
services that are recommended by individuals who are neither
physicians nor licensed practitioners, but who are operating under
the supervision of these individuals. Nor has the State shown that
the proposed services meet the requirements for any inpatient
setting within the scope of medical assistance, including hospitals,
nursing facilities, psychiatric hospital services for juveniles, or
intermediate care facilities for the mentally retarded.
In addition, the proposed SPA, does not appear to be consistent
with the requirement in section 1902(a)(19) of the Act that services
be provided ``in the best interests of the recipients.'' Indiana
permits the use of mechanical restraints and provides for extended
periods of seclusion of children in the facilities covered by this
amendment. CMS believes that these policies, defined in the Indiana
Administrative Code (470 IAC 3-11, 470 IAC 3-12, and 470 IAC 3-13)
and incorporated in this amendment by reference, would endanger the
health and welfare of the victims of these procedures, and cannot be
considered to be in the best interests of the children affected.
CMS found that the State has not demonstrated that the proposed
payment methodology would comply with section 1902(a)(30)(A) of the
Act, which requires that payments for services under the plan be
``consistent with efficiency, economy, and quality of care.'' The
payment methodology proposed by the State includes payment for
numerous cost items, including elements of room and board and
transportation services, that are not encompassed in the definition
of Medicaid rehabilitation services. For this reason, CMS found that
the State has not documented that the proposed payment methodology
would be efficient or economical.
Furthermore, the proposed payment methodology does not appear to
comply with the requirement for methods of administration that are
found by the Secretary to be ``proper and efficient'' for the
operation of the State plan, because the payment methodology
improperly includes payment for State administrative costs as
medical assistance. Section 1903(a) of the Act provides for FFP for
medical assistance at the Federal medical assistance percentage
rate, which is currently 62.32 percent in Indiana. Section 1903(a)
of the Act provides for FFP at the 50 percent match rate for
activities that have been found to be in support of the proper and
efficient administration of the state plan. The amendment would
include Medicaid administrative costs as part of the payment to
providers and thus would likely result in incorrect payment of FFP.
Because the proposed payment methodology commingles medical
assistance and administrative costs, CMS finds that the payment
methodology is not consistent with the requirement for proper and
efficient plan administration.
Equally important, section 1905(a) of the Act defines the term
``medical assistance'' as payment of part or all of the cost of care
and services furnished to eligible individuals. The reimbursement
section of this amendment, detailed at section 4.2.2 of the Indiana
Residential Care Reimbursement Rate Establishment document, and
included in Attachment 4.19B of this amendment, would appear to
provide payment for services furnished to individuals who have not
been determined eligible for Medicaid.
Based on the reasoning set forth above, and after consulting
with the Secretary as required by 42 CFR 430.15(c)(2), CMS
disapproved Indiana Medicaid SPA 02-021.
I am scheduling a hearing on your request for reconsideration to
be held January 20, 2005, at 10:00 a.m., 233 North Michigan Avenue,
Minnesota Room, Chicago, Illinois 60601 to reconsider the decision
to disapprove Indiana SPA 02-021.
If this date is not acceptable, we would be glad to set another
date that is mutually agreeable to the parties. The hearing will be
governed by the procedures prescribed at 42 CFR, part 430.
I am designating Ms. Kathleen Scully-Hayes as the presiding
officer. If these arrangements present any problems, please contact
the presiding officer. In order to facilitate any communication
which may be necessary between the parties to the hearing, please
notify the presiding officer to indicate acceptability of the
hearing date that has been scheduled and provide names of the
individuals who will represent the State at the hearing. The
presiding officer may be reached at (410) 786-2055.
Sincerely,
Mark B. McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
[[Page 1721]]
Section 1116 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1316); 42 CFR
430.18.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 13.714, Medicaid
Assistance Program)
Dated: January 5, 2005.
Mark B. McClellan,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
[FR Doc. 05-445 Filed 1-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-03-P