The Revised §1915(c) Waiver Application CMS Teleconferences Changes to the HCBS 1915 (c) Waiver August 8 th & 15 th, 2005 Presenter: Nancy Thaler, CMS.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Substantive Change Requesting Commission Approval of Substantive Changes at Institutions MSCHE Annual Meeting December 2009.
Advertisements

Procedures for ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Effective July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2014 Monitoring For Results.
MSCG Training for Project Officers and Consultants: Project Officer and Consultant Roles in Supporting Successful Onsite Technical Assistance Visits.
Coordinating Equitable Services for Private Schools Christine T. Miller Red Clay Consolidated School District December 7, 2010 DSU – Martin Luther King.
Copyright © Healthcare Quality Quest, Proposed standards for a national clinical audit — How we got involved and what we have learned.
Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) Data Management and Communication (DMAC) Standards Process Julie Bosch NOAA National Coastal Data Development.
Preparing for Compliance Monitoring Reviews Understanding CMS Protocols Used by Review Organizations January 14, 2009 Presented by: Margaret deHesse, RN,
THE STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS STEP 1 PUBLIC AND COMMITTEE PROPOSAL STAGE PUBLIC AND COMMITTEE PROPOSAL CLOSING DATE FIRST TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
External Examiners Preview Demonstrations Academic Services & Student Systems Presented by Daniel Chandler, Project Officer, Academic Services & Matthew.
Strengthening the Medical Device Clinical Trial Enterprise
Fundamentals of IRB Review. Regulatory Role of the IRB Authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research.
Learn More from UC about A-G
Decision Making Tools for Strategic Planning 2014 Nonprofit Capacity Conference Margo Bailey, PhD April 21, 2014 Clarify your strategic plan hierarchy.
Accelerating Opportunity Evaluation Planning the Evaluation with the Accelerating Opportunity States February 10, :30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
Orientation to the Physical Education K to 7 Integrated Resource Package 2006.
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013 Monitoring and Program Effectiveness.
REGIONAL PEER REVIEW PANELS (PRP) August Peer Review Panel: Background  As a requirement of the ESEA waiver, ODE must establish a process to ensure.
New Freedom Initiative A government-wide framework for helping provide elders and people with disabilities with necessary supports to live and fully participate.
Introduction to Proposal Writing Proposal Development Team Office of Research & Sponsored Projects (ORSP) September 30, 2009.
WHAT IS “CLASS”? A BRIEF ORIENTATION TO THE CLASS METHODOLOGY.
December 2010 Project Director’s Report OIDAP Quarterly Meeting Baltimore, MD Sylvia Karman OIDAP Member & Director, Office of Vocational Resources Development.
Student Learning Objectives The SLO Process Student Learning Objectives Training Series Module 3 of 3.
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
Balancing Incentive Program and Community First Choice Eric Saber Health Policy Analyst Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
Project Initiation Document (PID) Strategic Plan PID Committee Meeting - November 5, 2012.
Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.
Maricopa Priorities Status Update Fall Maricopa Priorities Basics What it isWhat it’s not A regular, cyclical, bottom-up process to: ▫Evaluate everything.
Spectrum of Self-Directed Care Maryland, Medicaid Office of Health Services John S. Wilson April 5, 2012 Community First Choice.
Water Supply Planning Initiative State Water Commission November 22, 2004.
ASSURANCES, FRAMEWORKS, DOMAINS… OH MY! Everything You Always Wanted to Know About QM Strategies But Were Afraid to Ask.
Quality assurance / Quality control system for the Greek GHG emissions inventory Yannis Sarafidis, Elena Georgopoulou UNFCCC Workshop on National Systems.
InWEnt | Qualified to shape the future1 Internet based Human Resource Development Management Platform Human Resource Development Programme in Natural Disaster.
Post-Secondary Education Program Joint AFN/INAC PSE Program Review with representation from NAIIHL and the Labrador Inuit Regional Information Process.
Quality Strategy June 10, 2009 Presented by: Debby McNamara, LCSW, PMP Quality Coordinator, AHCA.
Georgia Institute of Technology CS 4320 Fall 2003.
Circuit Rider Training Program (CRTP) Circuit Rider Professional Association Annual General Meeting and Conference August 30, 2012.
1 The Washington State Board of Education Applying to Authorize: Authorizer Application and Evaluation Jack Archer, Senior Policy Analyst State Board of.
Regional Policy Veronica Gaffey Evaluation Unit DG Regional Policy International Monitoring Conference Budapest 11 th November 2011 Budapest 26 th September2013.
Update on Charter Schools. What is the SBE’s role for charter schools? Washington State Board of Education Approve or deny applications by school districts.
Ohio Superintendent Evaluation System. Ohio Superintendent Evaluation System (Background) Senate Bill 1: Standards for teachers, principals and professional.
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility Participants Committee Meeting (FCPF PC3) Montreux, Switzerland June 16-18, 2009 Application of World Bank Safeguard.
NCLB Monitoring September 19, 2012 Webinar.
Procedures for ESEA Consolidated Monitoring Effective July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2014 Monitoring For Results Reviewed & Revised with COP April 2011.
UPDATING RIGHT OF WAY MANUALS FLORIDA’S PROCEDURES.
Presented by: Jan Stanley, State Title I Director Office of Assessment and Accountability June 10, 2008 Monitoring For Results.
PUBLIC–PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP (PPP) FRAMEWORK AND GUIDELINES Syed M. Ali Zaidi, P.Eng. PM(Stanford), Ph.D. Director, Strategic Partnerships Alberta Infrastructure.
ECOS Information Session Draft EPA Quality Documents February 13, 2013 Presented by EPA Quality Staff, Office of Environmental Information For meeting.
Federal Program Monitoring Overview and Organization.
Defense Standardization Program Policy Updates Steve Lowell Deputy Director Defense Standardization Program Office.
NSDI Strategic Plan Update National Geospatial Advisory Committee Meeting December 11, 2013.
1 Community-Based Care Readiness Assessment and Peer Review Overview Department of Children and Families And Florida Mental Health Institute.
Middle Fork Project Relicensing Process Plan April 25, 2006.
FRG: Getting Started | 1 Getting Started Third Edition, 2006.
Joint Contracting and Accreditation Process Nottingham City Council and NHS Nottingham City CCG.
CONSULTATION GUIDELINES IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE June 2007.
QAA COLLABORATIVE PROVISION AUDIT DRAFT REPORT. QAA CPA Process Submission by the University of Self Evaluation Document (SED) (December 2005) Selection.
© 2016 University at Buffalo Click Training Agreements Module University at Buffalo Office of the Vice President for Research and Economic Development.
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
SPR&I Regional Training
The Process for Final Approval: Ongoing Monitoring
ESF Evaluation Plan England
Reaccreditation and Illinois
1915(c) WAIVER REDESIGN 2019 Brain Injury Summit
Roles and Responsibilities
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013
Presentation transcript:

The Revised §1915(c) Waiver Application CMS Teleconferences Changes to the HCBS 1915 (c) Waiver August 8 th & 15 th, 2005 Presenter: Nancy Thaler, CMS

Topics to be covered  Application’s role in CMS over sight  New Application  Major Milestones  Policy changes and clarifications  Time Table and Key Activities  Draft Application Version 3.2  What if you don’t use the new application?

This is Part of Changing CMS Over-sight

Past Approach  Application had little information about quality and CMS had no requirements for states to report on quality  CMS staff did an on site inspection…once in five years  Small sample (<25) of people in systems with 25,000 – 50,000 people

New Approach  State build quality and self-direction into the design of their waiver application  State monitors individuals and fixes problems  State collects and analyzes data for trends and patterns across populations  State makes changes to policy, practices and resources based on their analysis  States report the QM activity and results to CMS and the public  CMS maintains and on “going dialogue” with states and looks for evidence of state over-sight Waiver Applicatio n Waiver Applicatio n

The HCBS Waiver Quality Life Cycle Phone Calls/ s Onsite Visits Evidentiary Reports CMS 372’s CMS Assess- ment Report CMS Assess- ment Report Renewal Application with QM Strategy State Submits to CMS State Ongoing Communication Initial Waivers Receive Draft Assessment Reports Renewed Waivers Receive Draft Assessment Reports CMS Initial Application with QM Strategy

Major Milestones

Major milestones  December 2003: Finalize quality framework – agreement to revise application  August 2004:First draft issued for comment:  October 2004 meeting with state associations  March 2005: Second Draft and Instructions, Technical Guide and Review Criteria issued for comment  April 2005: Meeting with State Associations + Cash & Counseling States  May 2005: Written comments from states and ROs  May 2005: Draft application available for use on a voluntary basis (Version 3.1)

Major milestones (cont’d)  March 2005: Second Draft and Instructions, Technical Guide and Review Criteria issued for comment  April 2005: Meeting with State Associations + Cash & Counseling States  May 2005: Written comments from states and ROs  May 2005: Draft application available for use on a voluntary basis (Version 3.1)  14 States using the application for one or more waivers

Policy Changes & Clarifications

New application …  Establishes that a waiver can be subject to a cost-limit less than the cost of institutional services  Explicitly provides for reserving waiver capacity  Explicitly provides for linking participant limit to phase-in schedule  Explicitly provides for managing the waiver under a “point in time” participant limit  Incorporates CMS expectations for managing quality

New application … (cont’d)  Clarifies policies concerning the provision of services by legally responsible individuals  Provides for integration of participant-direction opportunities in any program  Provides a means to phase-in participant direction geographically  Reduces confusion about waiver administrative arrangements  Recognizes the use of budget limits on package of services that individuals receive

Time Table & Key Activities

Time Table  May-June 2005: Reviewed Version 3.0 comments and suggestions from states  June 2005: Lock down application and revise instructions as necessary  June – September 2005: Design/program web- based application (MEDSTAT); State user group convened to review and comment on Appendices screen shots

Time Table (cont’d)  September 2005: Beta-version of application online for testing  September 2005   Ongoing refinement  Evaluate application and instructions based on user and CMS internal feedback  Web Cast demo of the automated application for States  January 2006…Go Live with the application  Jan – April. conduct evaluation

Web-based Application  Electronic preparation and submission  “Logic” is designed in, e.g. –  Choices drive what appears next (ex: linkage between eligibility groups and post-eligibility)  Complete once, auto fill in other modules (ex: C-1 service list drives C-3 specifications and auto-populates Factor D table in Appendix J  Goal: Online – informal RAIs + state responses, changes  Amendments handled online  Populate data base to create more robust, accessible information about waivers  No attachments

Evaluation  CMS will actively seek state user feedback concerning the new application  Especially with respect to:  Ease of use  Burden  Clarity of application and instructions  CMS also will evaluate:  Effects on how quickly applications are processed  Whether new application cuts down on RAIs  Consistency of CMS decision making

Draft Application Version 3.2

Draft Application Version 3.2  For states that want to use new application right away  May be used for new waivers or renewals  MS Word Document (not automated)  Includes changes from Version 3.1  New Instructions are not available

Using Version 3.2  ROs notify states that Version 3.2 is available for voluntary use  State contacts RO to request CD copy and notify of intent to use  RO schedules initial conference call with state, CO analyst and Deidra Abbott  Deidra Abbott will supervise the process and final decision making

Review Protocol for V 3.2  Joint RO/CO review  Assure consistency between RO and CO and across waiver applications  Prompt resolution of questions or problems  Learn from experience and factor new knowledge into final version

What if you don’t use the new application?  The application represents a consensus about what information is critical for CMS to approve a waiver application  Whether States use the new application or the 1995 Streamlined application, CMS must apply the same review standards to all applications.