A low administrative rate, even 0%, can be reported, if the plan wants to submit such a rate and the auditor finds no bias or other problems in the administrative process.
FAQ Directory
Here are some of the most frequently asked questions about NCQA’s various programs. If you don’t see what you are looking for in one of the entries below, you can ask a question through My NCQA.
Filter Results
-
Save
Save your favorite pages and receive notifications whenever they’re updated.
You will be prompted to log in to your NCQA account.
Save your favorite pages and receive notifications whenever they’re updated.
You will be prompted to log in to your NCQA account.
-
Email
Share this page with a friend or colleague by Email.
We do not share your information with third parties.
Share this page with a friend or colleague by Email.
We do not share your information with third parties.
-
Print
Print this page.
Print this page.
1.16.2013 Medical Record Review Validation For measures that are heavily or entirely reliant on MRR data (e.g., COA, ABA, WCC, CDC BPs), if an organization attempts MRR validation and fails, or is able to retrieve a only small percentage of charts, can they report an administrative rate as low as 0% (assuming no other issues are identified)?
1.16.2013 Medical Record Review Validation Can an auditor substitute one member in the MRRV sample of 16 if that members chart cannot be found?
Yes, substitution for one member is acceptable only if the organization cannot collect the chart because a practitioner is unable or unwilling to release it. The auditor has two options: he can select an original sample of 17 members (16 plus 1 oversample), and use the replacement member if the organization was unable to obtain a chart for one of the first 16 members, or he can send a 17th member when he is notified that one of the original 16 charts was unobtainable.
The auditors work papers should note which members chart was refused. If possible, the auditor should get a copy of the providers refusal letter or e-mail.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
HEDIS 20131.16.2013 Medical Record Review Validation If during MRR validation, a plan fails two samples, and informs the auditor they corrected the problem, what follow-up items are required to validate that the corrections were appropriate?
The auditor may use one or more methods to validate the chart error corrections. Follow-up actions should include:
· reviewing the error investigation and results
· reviewing policies and procedures to correct the error
· reviewing the corrected sample to ensure the updated numerator counts are correct and performing final hybrid rate review
· re-sampling charts for a new validation
Examples:
1. For the exclusions or data errors in the diabetes measure records, the auditor identified a pattern: she found two cases where the chart reviewer said the members did not have diabetes, but the chart showed that both members had elevated blood sugars and above average HbA1c results. One member had a PCP diagnosis of metabolic syndrome that placed him in the measure. The other member had a diagnosis of insulin resistance. The auditor required the plan to re-review all CDC exclusions and submitted charts for the remaining correct exclusions from the measure. The auditor approved reporting.
2. For the two MRRV samples, there were two errors found _ one in each sample. The auditor required the plan to do an analysis and demonstrate corrective actions.
The plan reported that one abstractor made the errors by incorrectly identifying the prior years CDC eye exams. The plan re-reviewed 100% of that abstractors hits and reversed 12 hits to misses. The plan had originally reported 100 admin hits and 200 hybrid hits for CDC eye exam. Of the 200 hybrid hits, 160 were measurement year eye exams, and 40 were negative retinopathy cases from the prior year. The auditor pulled another sample of 16, found no errors, and confirmed that the reported rate for the measure dropped from 73% to 70% as a result.
The auditor approved reporting.
3. The auditor found four errors in the first sample for AWC. He notified the plan and required them to do an analysis and demonstrate corrective actions. The plan submitted:
· the error investigation and results
· the policies and procedures that corrected the error
· a new sample of 16 that proved to have zero errors
· a new sample of 16 that proved to have zero errors
The auditor approved reporting.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
HEDIS 20131.16.2013 Medicare Measures in the P4P Manual The MY 2012 measure set document updated on December 6, 2012, does not include any Medicare measures, but Medicare measures are in the P4P manual. Why are the Medicare measures not listed in that document any longer?
The HEDIS-based Medicare Star measure results are collected, aggregated and reported at the PO level using the same process as for the commercial P4P program, but they are not part of the commercial P4P program and are not listed in the P4P measure set document. MA results will be publicly reported; health plans may choose to use the results as the basis for performance incentive payments, although no standard P4P program for MA currently exists.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
1.16.2013 All-Cause Readmissions (PCR) The MY 2012 P4P manual states that the All Cause Readmission measure will be collected as part of Medicare and is a mandatory testing measure for P4P, but this measure is not listed on the IHA Web site in the MY 2012 measure set.
Although P4P will collect the All Cause Readmission measure from health plans as part of the regular P4P clinical submission process, technically, it is an Appropriate Resource Use measure. As such, it is listed as a testing measure in the Appropriate Resource Use section. Note: Only health plans will submit results for this measure.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
1.16.2013 General Guidelines Can Health plans collect data from charts for a supplemental database and use the results for administrative rates?
Looking at charts is one way to collect data for a supplemental database (note: this activity should be distinguished from and not include chart review activities for the hybrid measures). All data in the supplement database, regardless of how it was collected, should be treated as administrative data. With the exception of standard data sources such as EHRs and state registries, supplemental databases should not be used during chart review for the hybrid measures.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
HEDIS 20131.16.2013 General Guidelines Should Medicare Advantage (MA) members who elect the hospice benefit and choose to remain enrolled in the MA plan be excluded from MA HEDIS denominators?
1.16.2013 Medical Record Review Validation Can the plan choose to rotate a measure that failed MRR validation?
The intent of measure rotation is to reduce chart review, not be a means to select the best rate possible. However, NCQA does not specifically prohibit this approach. Please note, if the reason for failing can be seen as possibly affecting other measures in the group, the auditor may elect to review those other measures.
This applies to the following Programs and Years:
HEDIS 20131.16.2013 Cholesterol Management for Patients With Cardiovascular Conditions (CMC) Under the event/diagnosis description on page 51 of the MY 2012 P4P manual, the sentence reads, Include AMI and CABG from inpatient claims only and use only. Use both facility and professional claims to identify AMI or CABG. Is the and use only a typo?
1.15.2013 Complex case management automated systems Must the entire clinical practice guideline be imbedded in the complex case management automated system?
1.15.2013 Look-back period for review of delegates for Interim Surveys Do Interim Surveys include review of the program elements (QI 12C, UM 15C, CR 9D, RR 7D, MEM 9D)?
12.17.2012 Qualifications for practitioners who review medical necessity denials Does a practitioner have to be actively participating in an organization to review medical necessity denials?
No. Being an actively practicing practitioner is not a requirement for reviewing medical necessity denials, although NCQA does require practitioners to have the education, training and experience in clinical or medical practice and be currently licensed in order to meet the requirements to make UM decisions.