FAQ Directory: Managed Behavioral Healthcare Organization Accreditation

Filter Results

2.15.2020 Measure Validity (MBHO) The explanation in Element A in CC 1 and CC 2 does not require that data collected results be valid or reliable measures; however, the explanation for Element D in CC 1 and Element C in CC 2 states that the organization must describe its methodology (numerator, denominator, sampling, measurement periods). Does NCQA review the validity and reliability of measure results in either Element A, C or D?

NCQA does not evaluate the validity or reliability of the measure in Element A, CC 1 and CC 2. In Element D in CC 1 and Element C in CC 2, NCQA evaluates the validity of the remeasurement relative to the initial measurement. For example, NCQA evaluates if sampling, timing or other methodological factors introduces bias or other issues of comparison when determining an intervention’s effectiveness.

MBHO 2019

1.15.2020 “Training and Experience” for Same or Similar Specialists Please clarify what is meant by “training and experience” for same or similar specialist in UM 8 and UM 9.

The purpose of same-or-similar specialist review of appeals is to apply specific clinical knowledge and experience when determining if an appeal meets criteria for medical necessity and clinical appropriateness. “Training and experience” refers to the practitioner’s clinical training and experience.
The intent is that the specialist reviewing the appeal would have encountered a patient with this condition who is considering or has received the service or procedure in a clinical setting. NCQA assesses whether the specialist is appropriate for the condition, service or procedure in question, and does not consider the referring practitioner type.

Effective January 1, 2020, NCQA accepts board certification in the same specialty as a proxy for clinical training and experience.
NCQA does not require that the same-or similar specialist reviewer be actively practicing.

Experience with the condition, service or procedure that is limited to UM decision making in cases similar to the appeal in question is not considered sufficient experience, nor do UM decision-making criteria supersede the requirement for same-or-similar specialist review.

MBHO 2020

1.15.2020 Denial Notifications to members via web portals If an organization uses a member web portal as a means of member written/electronic denial notification (which includes all requirements of UM 4 through UM 7), does this meet the UM denial notification requirements?

No, notification of denials to a member through a web portal does not meet the requirement for member notifications. However, emailing a denial notification directly to a member would be acceptable for electronic notification.

MBHO 2020

12.15.2019 Excluding organization employees and their dependents from complex case management (CCM) file review Should organizations exclude employees and their dependents from the CCM file review universe?

Yes. Employees and their dependents are excluded from the CCM file review universe.

MBHO 2019

10.15.2019 PHM 5: Assessment and Evaluation Does a combined summary of all factors in the assessment meet the requirement for documenting the conclusion of the initial assessment for PHM 5, Elements D and E?

Yes. Assessment and evaluation each require a case manager or a qualified individual to draw and document a conclusion about the data or information collected. Raw data or answers to questions do not meet the requirement; there must be a documented summary of the meaning or implications to the member’s situation, so data can be used in the case management plan.
The organization must draw a conclusion for each factor (unless otherwise stated in the explanation). This may be in separate summaries for each factor or in a combined summary, or in a combination of these.

MBHO 2019

10.15.2019 CR 7, Elements D and E: Assessing Medical and Behavioral Healthcare Providers Does NCQA require a separate tracking mechanism or report for each provider?

No. The organization must provide documentation of a tracking mechanism—or mechanisms (e.g., checklist or spreadsheet)—that encompass the required provider types

MBHO 2019

10.15.2019 CR 2, Element A, Factor 1 What is the required composition of the Credentialing Committee?

NCQA does not require a Credentialing Committee size, composition or quorum beyond that the committee must include practitioners who participate in the network.
Participating practitioners on the credentialing committee must be from a range of specialties or departments that represent the types of practitioners reviewed by the committee. For example, it would not be sufficient for only primary care practitioners to participate on the committee unless the network has only primary care practitioners.

MBHO 2020

8.15.2019 Scoring UM File Review workbook for UM 5 timeliness Requirements Since UM 5, Elements A, C and E decision timeliness requirements were retired for 2020, how will the file review workbook be completed for those elements for 2019?

Because of the complexities of the workbook formulas, we are unable to change the workbook to accept “NA” in time for 2019 Standards Year surveys. To correctly calculate the notification date scoring, a date must be entered in this field.
NCQA will not require organizations to provide documentation of the decision date and will instruct surveyors to enter the earliest of

The written notification date(s), or
The verbal notification date(s) (if applicable).

Regardless of the score calculated for decision date,

Surveyors will not score 30 files for this factor (although if it is necessary to review 30 files for the notification date, surveyors may need to complete this field, as described above for additional files).
Surveyors will score the element NA in IRT.

MBHO 2019

8.15.2019 Scoring UM 5 Timeliness Requirements The UM 5, Elements A, C, E timeliness requirements were retired in 2020 Health Plan Accreditation. These requirements will be scored NA in HPA 2019. Does that mean that the “Explanation” and the “Related information” sections of these elements regarding notifications no longer apply to UM 5, Elements B, D and F?

No. The “Explanation” and the “Related information” sections of UM 5, Elements A, C and E still apply to UM 5, Elements B, D and F, respectively. All applicable information was moved to the relevant elements for HPA 2020.

MBHO 2019

8.15.2019 UM 5 Timeliness Requirements The UM 5, Elements A, C, E timeliness requirements were retired in 2020 Health Plan Accreditation. These requirements will be scored NA in HPA 2019. How will this affect timeliness reporting in UM 5, Element G?

An “NA” score for UM 5, Elements, A, C and E will not affect the review of UM 5, Element G: UM Timeliness Report. However, NCQA still requires organizations to monitor and submit a report of timeliness of decision making and notification of decisions for UM 5, Element G.

MBHO 2019

3.15.2019 UM 8, Element A MAXIMUS What factors are scored “Met” for UM 8, Element A if an upheld denial was sent to MAXIMUS?

Factors 7-13 should be scored as “Met” for upheld denials sent to MAXIMUS.

MBHO 2018

3.15.2019 LTSS 4, Element C: Analysis of Unplanned transitions The explanation for LTSS 4, Element C, factor 1 states that analysis includes patterns of unplanned admissions, readmissions, emergency room visits and repeat visits, and admission to participating and nonparticipating facilities.
Is the organization required to include all these areas to meet the intent of the factor?

No. The organization is not required to include all these areas in its analysis, but at a minimum, must evaluate rates of unplanned admissions to facilities and emergency room visits to identify areas for improvement.

MBHO 2019