2012 EXTERNAL QUALITY REVIEW (EQR) PROTOCOLS



Similar documents
EQR PROTOCOLS INTRODUCTION

EQR PROTOCOL 1: ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH MEDICAID MANAGED CARE REGULATIONS

EQR PROTOCOL 6 CALCULATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES

EQR PROTOCOL 2 VALIDATION OF PERFORMANCE MEASURES REPORTED BY THE MCO

EQR PROTOCOL 4 VALIDATION OF ENCOUNTER DATA REPORTED BY THE MCO

EQR PROTOCOL 1 ASSESSING MCO COMPLIANCE WITH MEDICAID AND CHIP MANAGED CARE REGULATIONS

State Medicaid HIT Plan (SMHP) Overview

State Medicaid EHR Incentives and Strategic Developments

CMS AND ONC FINAL REGULATIONS DEFINE MEANINGFUL USE AND SET STANDARDS FOR ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD INCENTIVE PROGRAM

Medicare Advantage Quality Improvement Project Reporting Template

Sunday March 30, 2014, 9am noon HCCA Conference, San Diego

NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES EHR MEDICAID INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR ELIGIBLE HOSPITALS

Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology Supporting Meaningful Use. July 22, 2010

PROGRESS IN ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH HRSA GRANTS TO HEALTH CENTER CONTROLLED NETWORKS

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight

Payment Adjustments & Hardship Exceptions Tipsheet for Eligible Professionals Last Updated: March 2014

[Document Identifier: CMS-10003, CMS-10467, CMS-1450(UB-04), CMS-1500(08-05)]

July 17, Submitted electronically to:

Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicaid Integrity Program

Medical Assistance Provider Incentive Repository (MAPIR) - 13 State Collaborative

CMS FINALIZES REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MEDICAID ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS (EHR) INCENTIVE PROGRAM

The recently enacted Health Information Technology for Economic

Health Level Seven International Unlocking the Power of Health Information

MEDICARE PARTICIPATING PHYSICIAN OR SUPPLIER AGREEMENT

MEDICARE CREDIT BALANCE REPORT CERTIFICATION PAGE

Application of Existing External Quality Review Protocols to Managed Long Term Services and Supports

Texas Medicaid EHR Incentive Program: Dentists

Electronic Health Records. Going Beyond Data Collection to Making the Data Usable

MEDICAID ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD INCENTIVE PROGAM. Requirements

Health Information Technology

Payment Adjustments & Hardship Exceptions Tipsheet for Eligible Professionals

The Meaningful Use Stage 2 Final Rule: Overview and Outlook

Client Alert. CMS Releases Proposed Rule On Meaningful Use Of Electronic Health Record Technology

Wyoming. Eligible Hospitals Meaningful Use Stage 1 User Manual. March 20, 2014 Version 3

Summary of the Proposed Rule for the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Records (EHR) Incentive Program (Eligible Professionals only)

B October 29, 2015

EMR and Meaningful Use. How to Prepare for Audits and Avoid Penalties

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Details for: CMS PROPOSES DEFINITION OF MEANINGFUL USE OF CERTIFIED ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS (EHR) TECHNOLOGY. Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Quality Improvement Project (QIP) Reporting Tool

ERC Incentive Program - Overview and Tips

TABLE 22 MAXIMUM TOTAL AMOUNT OF EHR INCENTIVE PAYMENTS FOR A MEDICARE EP WHO DOES NOT PREDOMINATELY FURNISH SERVICES IN A HPSA

GAO ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS. First Year of CMS s Incentive Programs Shows Opportunities to Improve Processes to Verify Providers Met Requirements

Registration & Attestation For WV Medicaid EHR Incentive. Medicaid Professionals August 8, 2011

Environmental Protection Agency Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds ARRA Program Audit

BLUEPRINT FOR APPROVAL OF AFFORDABLE HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACES

Who are we? *Founded in 2005 by Purdue University, the Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering, and the Indiana Hospital Association.

Electronic Health Records and CLIA

Courtesy of Columbia University and the ONC Health IT Workforce Curriculum program

Independent diagnostic testing FacIlItIes site InvestIgatIon 42 cfr

HIPAA: AN OVERVIEW September 2013

Table of Contents. This file contains the following documents in the order listed:

Health Information Technology (IT) Simplified

MEDICARE EHR INCENTIVE PROGRAM ENROLLMENT LEARNING WEBINAR

SUMMARY OF HEALTH IT AND HEALTH DATA PROVISIONS OF H.R. 2, THE MEDICARE ACCESS AND CHIP REAUTHORIZATION ACT (MACRA)

UPDATE ON THE ADOPTION OF HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND RELATED EFFORTS TO FACILITATE THE ELECTRONIC USE AND EXCHANGE OF HEALTH INFORMATION

RFP ADDENDUM. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services Division of Medical Assistance

Eligible Professional Meaningful Use Attestation Manual

Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting Requirements

Meaningful Use Rules Proposed for Electronic Health Record Incentives Under HITECH Act By: Cherilyn G. Murer, JD, CRA

Blueprint for Approval of Affordable Statebased and State Partnership Insurance Exchanges

Florida Medicaid. Managed Care Quality Assessment & Improvement Strategies. 2008/2009 Update

2016 Medicaid Managed Care Rate Development Guide

Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing. Solicitation #: HCPFRFPSF13EHRATTAUDIT Electronic Health Record Attestation Auditing

The Medicare and Medicaid EHR incentive

shared with, and maintained by all providers and the MCO, PIHP, or PAHP that is coordinating the

Medicaid and CHIP FAQs: Enhanced Funding for Medicaid Eligibility Systems

Family Care Audit Guide Family Care, Family Care Partnership, & PACE Managed Care Organizations

APPENDIX V Information Systems Capabilities Assessment

West Virginia Electronic Health Records (EHR) Provider Incentive Program (PIP) For Eligible Hospitals Attestation Guide

STATE STANDARDS FOR ACCESS TO CARE IN MEDICAID MANAGED CARE

MEDICAID EHR INCENTIVES PROGRAM Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) For Eligible Professionals

HITECH and Meaningful Use - An Overview - To Enrich Lives Through Effective And Caring Service

Interim Final Rule on Standards, Implementation Specifications, and Certification Criteria

Provider User Manual. January 18, 2011 Version 1.4

Health Information Technology in Texas. Stephen Palmer Director, Office of e-health Coordination May 11, 2010

The Medicaid EHR Incentive Program: Overview, Program Integrity & Compliance

Agenda. OCR Audits of HIPAA Privacy, Security and Breach Notification, Phase 2. Linda Sanches, MPH Senior Advisor, Health Information Privacy 4/1/2014

March 15, Dear Dr. Blumenthal:

APPENDIX 1. Medicaid Emergency Psychiatric Demonstration Application Proposal Guidelines

West Virginia Provider Incentive Program Eligible Provider EHR Incentive Program Application Manual

Meaningful Use Stage 2 Requirements Primer

Meaningful Reporting From the EHR

Newborn Screening Interoperability Specification

Specifically, section 6035 of the DRA amended section 1902(a) (25) of the Act:

Florida Medicaid. Draft Comprehensive Quality Strategy Update

Summary of Public Health Related Aspects of Recent ONC and CMS Final Rules Version 1.0

B November 2, The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch Chairman The Honorable Ron Wyden Ranking Member Committee on Finance United States Senate

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Summary of Key Health Information Technology Provisions July 1, 2009

Answer: DHMH will make available MMIS data to assist with validating the numerator. The MMIS data contains MCO encounters.

Medicaid Managed Care Organization. Value-Based Purchasing Activities Report. Final Report. Calendar Year 2013

Six Steps to Achieving Meaningful Use Qualification, Stage 1

Health Information Technology Implementation Advanced Planning Document (HIT IAPD) Template

The Human Experiment- Electronic Medical/Health Records

Meaningful Use EHR Incentive Program

Fundamentals of MITA 3.0 CMS Perspective

HITECH Act Update: An Overview of the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs Regulations

AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor.

Non-Medical Transportation For HARP enrollees in NYC. December 2015

Transcription:

2012 EXTERNAL QUALITY REVIEW (EQR) PROTOCOLS APPENDIX V: INFORMATION SYSTEM CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT ACTIVITY REQUIRED FOR MULTIPLE PROTOCOLS TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW OF THE APPENDIX... 1 DATA COLLECTION, PROCESSING, AND REPORTING PROCESSES... 2 ACTIVITY 1: MCO COMPLETES INFORMATION SYSTEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT (ISCA). 3 ACTIVITY 2: REVIEW ISCA AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS... 3 ACTIVITY 3: INTERVIEW MCO STAFF... 3 ACTIVITY 4: ANALYZE ISCA FINDINGS... 4 THE FUTURE OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS ASSESSMENT... 4 Attachments Attachment A: Information System Capability Assessment (ISCA) Template Attachment B: Information System Review Worksheet and Interview Guide PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW OF THE APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to define the desired capabilities of the MCO s information system and assess the strength of the MCO s information system capabilities. Please note that although this appendix is not mandatory, States are mandated to perform information system capability assessments as part of the mandatory protocols. Furthermore, 42 C.F.R. 438.242 requires the State to ensure that each MCO maintains a health information system that collects, analyzes, integrates, and reports data for areas including, but not limited to, utilization, grievances and appeals, and disenrollment for other than loss of Medicaid eligibility. Per 42 C.F.R. 438.242, the system must be able to achieve the following: 1. Collect data on enrollee and provider characteristics as specified by the State and on services furnished to enrollees through an encounter data system or other methods as may be specified by the State; 2. Ensure that data received from providers are accurate and complete by: a. Verifying the accuracy and timeliness of reported data; b. Screening the data for completeness, logic, and consistency; and c. Collecting service information in standardized formats to the extent feasible and appropriate; and According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 0938-0786. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 1,591 hours per response for all activities, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: CMS, 7500 Security Boulevard, Attn: PRA Reports Clearance Officer, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850

3. Make all collected data available to the State and upon request to CMS, as required in this subpart. This appendix provides a basic overview of the processes of collecting, processing, and reporting data, four activities for performing the assessment, and information about the future of information system assessments. Assessment of MCO s information systems is a process of 4 consecutive activities. The MCO will complete Activity 1, which involves the collection of standard information about its information system using an Information Systems Capability Assessment (ISCA) (found in Attachment A) or similar tool. Activities 2 and 3 are reviews of the ISCA performed by the EQRO and based on interactive sessions with MCO staff to validate the completed ISCA and gather additional information to assess the integrity of the information in the ISCA. The EQRO can use the Managed Care Organization Information System Review: Worksheet & Interview Guide (Worksheet) in Attachment B to conduct interviews with MCO staff who completed the ISCA, as well as other necessary MCO staff. Activity 4 involves analyzing the findings from both the completed ISCA and the follow-up discussions with MCO staff. DATA COLLECTION, PROCESSING, AND REPORTING PROCESSES A basic overview of the data process flow from healthcare encounter to EQRO is provided here to provide a context for the information system assessment for which the State and EQRO are responsible. The process is described in more detail below Diagram 1. Diagram 1: Data Process Flow 1. Provider Data 1.1 Enter data about services in IS 1.2 Process encounter data 1.3 Submit requested data and/or elements to MCO 2. MCO Data 3.1 Validate MCO data (in 2.3) 2.2 Validate provider data processing and submission (in 1.2 and 1.3) 2.3 Submit data processed by MCO IS to EQRO 3. EQR Data Activities 3.1 Validate MCO data (in 2.3) 3.2 Validate MCO processing (in 2.1) 3.3 Validate MCO's validation of provider data processing (in 2.2) 1. Provider data activities 1.1. Provider records their encounters in a hybrid of paper/ electronic format (increasingly electronic) 1.2. Provider uses its information system to process and clean the data, compile it, scrub it, etc. 2

1.3. Provider submits processed encounter data to the MCO for payment, for specific measures, for audit, etc. 2. MCO data activities 2.1. MCO receives provider data (claims, encounters, certified EHR technology), uses it for payment (claims) or other purposes (received in a transaction file), and enters it into a data repository 2.2. MCO validates the provider s accurate capture, processing, and submission of their data to the MCO by performing edit checks on claims, random medical record reviews, and/or other methods 2.3. MCO processes data in its data repository and submits data to the EQRO (or State) 3. EQRO data activities 3.1. EQRO validates the data in its repository or that the MCO or other organization (e.g., claims processing vendor, State repository) submitted for EQR purposes 3.2. EQRO validates the accuracy of the provider s data and the accuracy with which it was processed by the MCO (instructions for this validation are provided in Protocols 2, 4, 6, and 9) 3.3. EQRO validates that the MCO is ensuring the providers are accurately processing and submitting data to the MCO ACTIVITY 1: MCO COMPLETES INFORMATION SYSTEM CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT (ISCA) Some States assess the capabilities of the MCO s information system as part of pre-contracting, contract compliance, or contract renewal activities. If an assessment has been completed by the State through these or other means (e.g., private sector accreditation or performance measures validation), and the information gathered is the same as or consistent with what is described in this assessment, it may not be necessary to repeat this assessment process. However, information from previously conducted assessments must be accessible to EQRO reviewers. Completing the ISCA provided in Attachment A requires that the MCO provide all requested documentation identified on a checklist at the end of the assessment tool and return it to the EQRO within a State-defined time frame. ACTIVITY 2: REVIEW ISCA AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS The EQRO assesses the adequacy of MCO policies and procedures as portrayed by the information submitted by the MCO on the ISCA. MCO answers should be evaluated against the information system standards established by the State to calculate and report specific plan-level performance measures, and collect and submit encounter data to the State. The EQRO should note incomplete or insufficient sections of the ISCA to identify specific policies, procedures, and documentation most likely to affect the integrity of information collected by the MCO. The EQRO should discuss and further review such issues during the MCO site visit. ACTIVITY 3: INTERVIEW MCO STAFF The EQRO reviewer(s) conduct(s) interviews with MCO staff responsible for completing the ISCA, as well as additional staff responsible for aspects of the MCO s information system function. The interviews focus on the topics outlined in the structured ISCA interview guide, with additional topics covered as necessary based on the pre-onsite analysis of the ISCA in Activity 2. Attachment B 3

provides a worksheet and interview guide for reviewing the ISCA. The information system interview with the MCO should be closely coordinated with the MCO site visit performed in Protocol 1. Refer to Protocol 1, Activity 3 for steps in conducting a successful MCO site visit. ACTIVITY 4: ANALYZE ISCA FINDINGS The EQRO will write a statement of findings at the conclusion of the review of the ISCA. This statement of findings about the MCO s information system should include implications of the finding for the following: 1. Completeness and accuracy of encounter data collected and submitted to the State; 2. Validation and/or calculation of performance measures; 3. Ability of the information system to conduct MCO quality assessment and improvement initiatives; and 4. Ability of the information system to oversee and manage the delivery of health care to the MCO s enrollees. THE FUTURE OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS ASSESSMENT With the increasing uptake of more sophisticated and comprehensive information systems, it will be important to adapt the way information systems capabilities are assessed. As information systems evolve, so will the tools and rules with which States and EQROs can use to assess them. Currently, the industry has a clear understanding of physical security and integrity of information systems, but is much less clear on how to assess the technical security and integrity of those same information systems. As noted elsewhere (see Methodology), existing statutory requirements regarding privacy and security supports, as well as guidance and tools, might be considered suitable topics for voluntary special projects in performance improvement, as in Protocols 7 and 8. Given the ongoing and accelerating accumulation of health information technology (HIT) standards, HIT certification requirements, and HIT qualifications proposed and imposed by Federal payers, organizations must anticipate near-term changes in assessments of new information system requirements. Particularly pertinent to the future of information systems assessment is Section 4201 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which allows for the payment of incentives to eligible professionals and hospitals to promote the adoption and meaningful use of certified electronic health records (EHRs). Under the Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Program, eligible providers can receive 100 percent federal financial participation (FFP) to adopt, implement, upgrade, and meaningfully use certified EHR technology. Additionally, States can benefit from 90 percent FFP for any State administrative expenses related to the implementation of the program. Therefore, it is important for both States and MCOs to work cooperatively in the planning and use of certified EHRs and health information exchange systems. The design and utilization of secure EHRs will become an increasingly important element in the EQR process and is reflected in Appendix B of this Appendix V. Finally, with the enactment and implementation of the Affordable Care Act, States and MCOs must coordinate their HIT planning efforts to ensure interoperability between systems that effectively provide for future data needs to meet eligibility, enrollment, Health Insurance Exchange, and Accountable Care Organization statutory and regulatory requirements. EQROs should continually assess MCO planning activities to ensure alignment with and responsiveness to these initiatives. 4

In order to learn from and share State experiences with emerging HIT and EHR initiatives that can impact reporting of performance measure and performance improvement project outcomes, CMS strongly encourages States to contract with EQROs to include results of State HIT and EHR initiatives in annual EQR reports. This may include successful implementation of health information exchange with other State agencies to improve data source collection efforts for performance measures or performance improvement projects. Similarly, including lessons learned from challenging or unsuccessful HIT initiatives are just as informative to Federal and other State partners, and may be a valuable source of information to be included in the Annual Secretary s Report on Quality published each September. END OF DOCUMENT 5