Posts Tagged ‘state health’

CMS CHIPRA Dental State Health Official Letter

October 7th, 2009

CMS Issues State Letter for Dental Coverage in CHIP

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
7500 Security Boulevard, Mail Stop S2-26-12
Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850
Center for Medicaid and State Operations
SHO #09-012
CHIPRA # 7
October 7, 2009

RE: Dental Coverage in CHIP

Dear State Health Official (full letter on the CMS site):
The Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA), Public Law 111-3, reauthorizes the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) under title XXI of the Social Security Act (the Act). CHIPRA ensures that States are able to continue their existing CHIP programs and provides funding to expand health insurance coverage to additional low-income uninsured children including children already eligible for CHIP or Medicaid but not enrolled. The purpose of this letter is to provide general guidance on some of the provisions in section 501 of CHIPRA, including the dental benefit provisions and the State option to provide dental-only supplemental coverage, pending the issuance of regulations.

Required Dental Services

Section 2103(c)(5) of the Act, as added by section 501 of CHIPRA, requires that “child health assistance provided to a targeted low-income child shall include coverage of dental services necessary to prevent disease and promote oral health, restore oral structures to health and function, and treat emergency conditions.” This requirement applies to all child health assistance coverage described in section 2103 and is effective October 1, 2009.

Medicaid Expansions

States that provide title XXI coverage to children through a Medicaid expansion program are required to provide Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (EPSDT) services, as defined in section 1905(r) of the Act. The dental services provided under a Medicaid expansion program through EPSDT will be considered to meet the requirements of this provision.

Separate CHIP Programs

States that provide coverage in a separate CHIP program may choose between two methods of providing the dental services as required by section 2103(c)(5) of the Act. The State may define the services in the dental benefit package and demonstrate that the package includes all of the services required by the statute. In so doing, the State should specify the periodicity schedule with which preventative and restorative services, such as cleanings and fillings, would be provided, as well as whether these services are sufficient to prevent further disease, as required by section 2103(c)(5). This applies to State-defined benefit packages and dental benchmark packages as described below.
Alternatively, the State may provide a dental benefit package that is equivalent to one of the three dental benchmark packages described in the CHIPRA statute. Under the statute, there is no option in new section 2103(c)(5) of the Act for proving actuarial equivalence or modifying the benefit package. States may, however, cover benefits in addition to the dental benchmark plan consistent with the standards in section 2103(c)(5).

In order to fully describe a State dental benefit package under a separate CHIP program, and ensure that the benefits are sufficient to meet the statutory requirements, a State should describe both the types of covered benefits and the covered amount or duration of those benefits. The amount or duration should also be expressed through identification of the periodicity schedule that the State will use in its program. The periodicity schedule sets the frequency by which certain services should be provided and will be covered. We encourage States to rely on nationally recognized standards, including Medicaid dental periodicity guidelines used for children under EPSDT or the guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD). The link to AAPD’s periodicity guidelines can be found at: http://www.aapd.org/media/Policies_Guidelines/G_Periodicity.pdf.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookShare

Secretary Sebelius Awards $40 Million to States to Find, Enroll Children in CHIP, Medicaid

October 1st, 2009

Secretary Sebelius Awards $40 Million in Grants for Either Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced $40 million in grants to 69 grantees in 41 states and the District of Columbia to help them find and enroll children who are uninsured but eligible for either Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

“Today’s awards will help fulfill President Obama’s pledge to assure the health and well-being of our nation’s children,” said Secretary Sebelius.  “With millions of Americans either out of work or otherwise struggling to make ends meet during this recession, there is an even greater urgency to bring steady, reliable health care to children in these families who may have lost their coverage.”

Recognizing that millions of children are eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, but are therefore needlessly uninsured, the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) set aside $100 million for fiscal years 2009-2013 expressly to help find and enroll eligible children.  Of the total outreach amount, $80 million will be given to states and other organizations, $10 million to Tribal organizations and $10 million for a national outreach effort. Today’s awards are for a two year period ending Dec. 31, 2011, which will then be followed by a second round of $40 million in new grants.

As called for in CHIPRA, grants were awarded to applicants whose outreach, enrollment and retention efforts will target geographic areas with high rates of eligible but uninsured children, particularly those with racial and ethnic minority groups who are uninsured at higher-than-average rates.  For example, 20 percent of the projects to be funded will target Hispanic children, with an emphasis on Hispanic teens, and 11 percent will focus on homeless children and seven percent will be aimed at Native American/Alaska Native children.

The vast majority of grantees will be using multiple, community-based approaches. One grantee in Missouri, for example, will work with a consortium of 35 churches in low-income, minority communities.  Those parishioners will go door-to-door to locate potentially eligible children and then help those families apply for CHIP or Medicaid coverage.  Another grantee will place self-service kiosks in community centers and Native American Chapter Houses (community halls) where there will also be staff available to help with applications if needed.  One state school system will track children who receive free or reduced cost lunches and, with the families’ permission, share that information with state health programs, which will, in turn, mail applications for CHIP and Medicaid to those families.  The state will also provide one-on-one-assistance with those applications.

The grant awards require that recipients be able to show actual increases in enrollment and retention of children already in the programs.  Both CHIP and Medicaid state agencies are to report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicare Services (CMS) the number of new enrollees and those who retained coverage that are directly attributable to the grant activities.  Grantees are also to report activities they believe were the most effective in finding, enrolling and maintaining children in these benefit programs.

“No child in America should go without decent health care,” said Cindy Mann, director of the Center for Medicaid and State Operations — the group within CMS that will administer the grants. “With the funds we are awarding today we hope to reduce the number of children who do.”

A list of grantees by state is below.

State

Grantee

Award

Arizona

Pima Community Access Program

$982,577

Alabama

Alabama Primary Care Association

$987,732

Tombigbee Healthcare Authority

$141,167

Alaska

Alaska Youth and Family Network

$198,304

Norton Sound Health Corporation

$72,999

Arkansas

St. Francis House NWA Inc., Community Clinic

$162,965

California

Providence Little Company of Mary Foundation

$317,144

Yolo County Children’s Alliance (YCCA)

$399,900

Colorado

Colorado Association of School Based Health Care

$499,835

Telluride Foundation

$301,410

Connecticut

Community Health Center Association of Connecticut

$988,177

Community Health Center, Inc. (CHC)

$400,584

District of Columbia

National Alliance for Hispanic Health

$984,144

Florida

Fanm Ayisyen Nan Miyami, Inc. (FANM)

$69,102

University of South Florida

$988,177

Georgia

West End Medical Centers Inc.

$571,135

Medical College of Georgia Research Institute

$986,827

Hawaii

Bay Clinic, Inc.

$200,000

Hawaii Primary Care Association

$488,187

Illinois

Chicago Public Schools

$235,173

Beacon Therapeutic School, Inc. of Chicago

$250,830

Idaho

Mountain States Group, Inc.

$287,896

Indiana

St. Vincent Health Inc.

$864,309

Kansas

Inter-Faith Ministries Wichita Inc.

$523,932

Keys for Networking

$866,749

Louisiana

Louisiana State Department of Health and Hospitals

$955,681

TECHE Action Board

$234,808

Maine

Maine Department of Health and Human Services

$680,249

Maine Primary Care Association

$311,061

Maryland

Garrett County Health Department

$200,000

MD Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

$988,177

Massachusetts

Health Care for All, Inc.

$410,815

South End Community Health Center

$304,385

Michigan

Michigan Primary Care Association

$915,079

YMCA of Greater Grand Rapids

$293,040

Minnesota

Portico Healthnet, Inc.

$988,177

Vietnamese Social Services of Minnesota

$280,000

Mississippi

Mississippi Primary Health Care Association

$988,152

Missouri

Missouri Coalition for Primary Health Care

$332,173

St. Louis Children’s Hospital Foundation

$985,373

Montana

Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services

$971,868

Nebraska

One World Community Health Centers Inc.

$706,264

New Hampshire

Cheshire Medical Center

$143,700

New Jersey

Health Research and Educational Trust of New Jersey

$988,177

New Jersey Department of Human Services, Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services

$988,177

New Mexico

First Nations Community Health Source

$355,000

New Mexico Human Services Department

$957,221

New York

The Mary Imogene Bassett Hospital

$498,718

Structured Employment Economic Development Corporation

$988,177

North Carolina

North Carolina Pediatric Society Foundation

$678,210

Ohio

Dayton Public Schools

$327,900

Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati

$316,418

Oklahoma

Oklahoma Health Care Authority

$988,177

Oregon

Oregon Department of Health and Human Services

$988,177

Northeast Oregon Network of LaGrande

$465,982

Pennsylvania

Concern for Health Options, Information, Care & Education (CHOICE)

$200,000

Consumer Health Coalition

$299,750

South Carolina

Palmetto Project, Inc.

$981,009

Texas

Texas Leadership Center

$988,177

YWCA of Lubbock, TX, INC.

$384,680

Utah

Association for Utah Community Health

$762,580

Virginia

Catholic Charities USA (CCUSA)

$957,617

Virginia Health Care Foundation

$988,154

Washington

HIP of Spokane County/Community Minded Enterprise (CME)

$299,766

Puget Sound Neighborhood Health Centers Neighborcare

$150,000

West Virginia

West Virginia Alliance for Sustainable Families

$330,700

Wyoming

Wind River Health Systems Inc.

$381,895

Wisconsin

Wisconsin Department of Health Services

$988,177

Wyoming

Wyoming Department of Health

$268,889

TwitterLinkedInFacebookShare

“Meaningful” Progress Toward Electronic Health Information Exchange

October 1st, 2009

A Message from Dr. David Blumenthal, National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

I recently reported on our announcement of State Health Information Technology Grants and grants to establish Health Information Technology Regional Extension Centers, as authorized under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Recovery Act).

Today I want to discuss the important term “meaningful use” of electronic health records (EHRs) – both as a concept that underlies the movement toward an electronic health care environment and as a practical set of standards that will be issued as a proposed regulation by the end of 2009.

The HITECH Act provisions of the Recovery Act create a truly historic opportunity to transform our health system through unprecedented investments in the development of a nationwide electronic health information system.  This system will ultimately help facilitate, inform, measure, and sustain improvements in the quality, efficiency, and safety of health care available to every American.  Simply put, health professionals will be able to give better care, and their patients’ experience of care will improve, leading to better health outcomes overall.

As many of you are aware, the HITECH Act provides incentive payments to doctors and hospitals that adopt and meaningfully use health information technology.  Eligible physicians, including those in solo or small practices, can receive up to $44,000 over five years under Medicare or $63,750 over six years under Medicaid for being meaningful users of certified electronic health records.  Hospitals that become meaningful EHR users could receive up to four years of financial incentive payments under Medicare beginning in 2011, and up to six years of incentive payments under Medicaid beginning in October 2010.

The HITECH Act’s financial incentives demonstrate Congress’ and the Administration’s commitment to help those who want to improve their care delivery, and will serve as a catalyst to accelerate and smooth the path to HIT adoption by more individual providers and organizations.  The dollars are tangible evidence of a national determination to bring health care into the 21st century.

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) is charged with coordinating nationwide efforts to implement and use the most advanced health information technology and the electronic exchange of health information. ONC is working with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), through an open and transparent process, on efforts to officially designate what constitutes “meaningful use.”

ONC has already engaged in a broad range of efforts to support the development of a formal definition of meaningful use.  The HITECH Act designated a federal advisory committee, the HIT Policy Committee, with broad representation from major health care constituencies, to provide recommendations to ONC on meaningful use.  The HIT Policy Committee has provided two sets of recommendations, informed by input from a variety of stakeholders.  ONC and CMS have also conducted a series of listening sessions to solicit feedback from more than 200 representatives of various constituent groups and an open comment period where over 800 public comments were submitted and reviewed.  The second set of recommendations on meaningful use was issued at a July 16 HIT Policy Committee meeting and details can be found at healthit.hhs.gov/policycommittee.

CMS is expected to publish a formal definition of meaningful use, for the purposes of receiving the Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments, by December 31, 2009. At that time, the public will be able to comment on the definition, and such comments will be considered in reaching any final definition of the term.

By focusing on “meaningful use,” we recognize that better health care does not come solely from the adoption of technology itself, but through the exchange and use of health information to best inform clinical decisions at the point of care.  Meaningful use of EHRs, we anticipate, will also enable providers to reduce the amount of time spent on duplicative paperwork and gain more time to spend with their patients throughout the day.  It will lead us toward improvements and sustainability of our health care system that can only be attained with the help of a reliable and secure nationwide electronic health information system.

The concept of meaningful use is simple and inspiring, but we recognize that it becomes significantly more complex at a policy and regulatory level.  As a result, we expect that any formal definition of “meaningful use” must include specific activities health care providers need to undertake to qualify for incentives from the federal government.

Ultimately, we believe “meaningful use” should embody the goals of a transformed health system.  Meaningful use, in the long-term, is when EHRs are used by health care providers to improve patient care, safety, and quality.

What’s next?

As stated above, the next step in our process is a notice of proposed rulemaking in late 2009 with a public comment period in early 2010.  As this process unfolds, we will continue to talk and share experiences about transitioning to EHRs, and to help deepen understanding among physicians and hospitals about the use of EHRs.  We will also present programs designed to help smooth the transition process, and identify activities physicians and hospitals can engage in now to promote adoption of EHRs.  As efforts advance, we will turn our attention to other necessary supporting programs, some of which you will hear more about in the coming weeks, including defining what constitutes a “certified” EHR, which is one of the requirements to qualify for Medicare and Medicaid incentives.

In the meantime, what can providers do to move toward becoming “meaningful users” – even in the absence of a formal definition?  Naturally, while understanding that the final definition will be adopted through a formal rulemaking process, it will be helpful to be as familiar as possible with the discussion of meaningful use criteria to date.  (You will find that information posted at healthit.hhs.gov/meaningfuluse.)

Armed with an understanding of the discussion of meaningful use as it unfolds, providers can begin to consider how their own practices or organizations might be reshaped to enhance the efficiency and quality of care through the use of an electronic health record system.  Be assured you will not be alone as you seek to adopt an EHR system.  Through our recently announced collaborative HITECH grants programs and others to be initiated later this year, we will continue to support providers in moving forward.  Additional details about the grants are also available in my previous update and at healthit.hhs.gov/HITECHgrants.

To some providers, particularly small or already stretched physician practices or small, rural hospitals, the path toward meaningful use may still seem arduous.  To others, who would just prefer to stick with the “status quo,” it may seem like an unwanted intrusion.  We believe that the time has come for coordinated action.  The price of inaction – in adverse events, lost patient lives, delayed or improper treatments, unnecessary procedures, excessive costs, and so on – is just too high, and will only get worse.

There is much at stake and much to do.  We must relieve the crushing burden of health care costs in this country by improving efficiency, and assuring the highest level of patient care and safety regardless of geography or demographics.  By using current technologies in a meaningful way, as well as technology to be developed in the future, we will take great strides toward solving some of the most vexing problems facing our health care system and creating a new platform for innovative solutions to health care.

I look forward to providing periodic updates, and to continued interactions with all the communities that have so much to gain from this profound transformation.

Sincerely,

David Blumenthal, M.D., M.P.P.
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

TwitterLinkedInFacebookShare

Michigan’s Health Information Exchange Plan for Stimulus Funds

September 29th, 2009

Michigan Health Information Network Provides Guidance to Regions

After convening various health care stakeholders, including hospitals, doctors, regional providers and insurance companies, officials divided the state into nine medical trading areas, each of which covers several counties, nextgov reports.

Of the nine health information exchanges in Michigan, two have moved from the planning to the implementation phase.

IBM opened a new software development facility in East Lansing, Mich., on Tuesday that’s expected to generate as many as 1,500 new jobs over the next five years. IBM’s decision to locate in Michigan was followed by a similar move from General Electric, which announced in June that it would build an advanced technology and training center in Wayne County that will employ 1,200 people.

In September, the Department of Community Health in Lansing, sent a letter to the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, stating their intent to to apply for the CFDA# 93.719 State Health Information Exchange (HIE) Cooperative Agreement Program.

The Michigan Health Information Network (MiHIN) consists of nine regions.

Michigan HIE Regions
HIESponsoring OrganizationCounties
Upper PeninsulaMarquette General Health SystemAlger, Baraga, Chippewa, Delta, Dickinson, Gogebic, Houghton, Iron, Keweenaw, Luce, Mackinac, Marquette, Menominee, Ontonagon and Schoolcraft
Northern Lower PeninsulaNorth Central Council of the MHAAlcona, Alpena, Antrim, Benzie, Charlevoix, Cheboygan, Crawford, Emmet, Grand Traverse, Iosco, Kalkaska, Leelanau, Manistee, Missaukee, Montmorency, Ogemaw, Oscoda, Otsego, Preseque Isle, Roscommon and Wexford
Central Michigan Central Michigan University
See MIHIA.org
Arenac, Bay, Clare, Gladwin, Gratiot, Huron, Isabella, Midland, Saginaw, Sanilac and Tuscola
West MichiganAlliance For Health
See the Health Care Vision 2020 Website
Barry, Ionia, Kent, Lake, Mason, Mecosta, Montcalm, Muskegon, Newaygo, Oceana, Osceola and Ottawa
Capital AreaCapital Area Health AllianceClinton, Eaton and Ingham
Genesee AreaGreater Flint Health CoalitionGenessee, Lapeer and Shiawassee
Southeastern Michigan Altarum Institute
See SEMHI.org
Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair and Wayne
Southwestern Michigan ChangeScape
See MIHealtheLink.org
Berrien, Branch, Calhoun, Cass, Kalamazoo, St. Joseph and Van Buren
South Central MichiganAltarum
See HealthCurrent.org
Hillsdale, Jackson, Lenawee, Livingston and Washtenaw
TwitterLinkedInFacebookShare
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes

Page optimized by WP Minify WordPress Plugin