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.

  • Email

    Share this page with a friend or colleague by Email.

    We do not share your information with third parties.

  • Print

    Print this page.

expand all

3.15.2020 36-month Recredentialing time frame Does NCQA allow an organization to extend the 36-month recredentialing time frame if it failed to credential a practitioner on time?

No. Except as noted under “Related information: Extending the recredentialing cycle length,” where NCQA makes provisions for situations such as active duty military assignment and medical leave, the organization may not extend the 36-month recredentialing cycle. If the practitioner is not recredentialed within 36 months, the file will be scored down. There is no grace period for recredentialing.
If an organization missed the recredentialing deadline and intends to keep the practitioner in the network, files must be processed as follows:

  • If the organization can complete the credentialing process within 30 days of the original due date, it may recredential the practitioner (e.g., the organization need not verify credentials required only at initial credentialing). The organization must complete the process and make the credentialing decision within 30 days of the original credentialing due date.
  • If the organization cannot complete the credentialing process within 30 calendar days of the original recredentialing due date, it must take the practitioner through the initial credentialing process.

MBHO 2019

3.15.2020 Clarifying HPA 2020 Scoring with File Review Scoring Question Please explain “PARTIALLY MET” for scoring that reads “High (90-100%) or medium (60-89%) on file review for X factors” in file review elements (e.g., PHM 5, Element D)?

Interpret that text to mean any combination of high and medium other than the scoring thresholds specified for “MET.”
For example, an organization must earn “high” on 7 factors to score MET on PHM 5, Element D; therefore, to score “PARTIALLY MET” for that element, it may earn “high” on 0–6 factors and “medium” on the remaining factors.

HP 2020

3.15.2020 PHM 3, Element A, Factor 3: Practice transformation support Does reporting a physician’s designation or status as “integrated or advanced” practice in a web-based physician directory meet the requirement to support practice transformation?

No. Publicly reporting a practice’s designation or status does not constitute “active support.” Organizations may actively support transformation through financial incentives, learning collaboratives, MOC credits and other methods.

HP 2020

3.15.2020 Using Complaint Data to Supplement Surveys or Self-Reported Information In NET 2, Elements A–C, if an organization collects data using surveys or practitioner self-reported information, it must supplement the data with an analysis of complaints regarding access. Are organizations required to conduct a complete quantitative and qualitative analysis of complaint data?

No. Supplemental complaint data validates survey findings and self-reported information and assists in qualitative analysis of primary data. The organization is not required to conduct complete quantitative and qualitative analysis of supplemental data.

HP 2020

3.15.2020 PHM 3, Element B: Value Based Payment Arrangements Does NCQA require organizations to have more than one type (e.g., pay-for-performance, shared savings) of value-based payment arrangement per product line?

No. An organization meets the requirement if it has at least one VBP of any type per product line. Organizations may report more than one VBP arrangement per product line but are not required to do so.

HP 2020

2.15.2020 UM Timeliness Report Under 2020 HPA standards, UM 5, Element D requires organizations to monitor UM decision making and notification using UM 5 decision time frames, even though UM 5, Elements A, C and E were eliminated under the 2020 standards. Is this correct?

Yes, it is correct. The elimination of Elements A, C and E does not affect the review of Element D: UM Timeliness Report. The expectation is that the report includes timeliness for both decision making and notification of the decision given that the report includes denials and approvals. NCQA does not require written notification for approvals; therefore, timeliness for approvals is only reported under decisions.

UM-CR-PN 2020

2.15.2020 UM Timeliness Report (MBHO) Under 2020 MBHO standards, UM 5, Element B requires organizations to monitor UM decision making and notification using UM 5 decision time frames, even though UM 5, Element A was eliminated under the 2020 standards. Is this correct?

Yes, it is correct. The elimination of Element A does not affect the 2020 review of Element B: UM Timeliness Report. The expectation is that the report includes timeliness for both decision making and notification of the decision given that the report includes denials and approvals. NCQA does not require written notification for approvals; therefore, timeliness for approvals is only reported under decisions.

MBHO 2020

2.15.2020 Measure Validity The explanation in Element A in QI 3 and QI 4 does not require that data collected results be valid or reliable measures; however, the explanation for Element C in QI 3 and QI 4 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 or C?

NCQA does not evaluate the validity or reliability of the measure in Element A, QI 3 and QI 4. In Element C, QI 3 and QI 4, 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.

HP 2020

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

2.14.2020 Follow-Up After High-Intensity Care for Substance Use Disorder Direct Transfer instructions state, “Identify direct transfers to an acute inpatient care or residential setting during the 30-day follow-up period.” Should readmissions during the 30-day period also be identified?

No. Only direct transfers during the 30-day follow-up period should be identified. A “direct transfer” is when the discharge date from the first acute inpatient or residential care setting precedes the admission date to a second acute inpatient or residential care setting by one calendar day or less.
If a member had a stay from January 1–5, followed by readmission on January 6 and discharge on January 8, this is considered a direct transfer and the January 8 discharge date is used for reporting.
If a member had a stay from January 1–5 and a stay from January 8–10, this is considered a readmission. The “multiple discharges, visits or events during in a 31-day period” rule applies; the January 5 discharge is used for reporting and the January 10 discharge is dropped.

HEDIS 2020

2.14.2020 Prenatal and Postpartum Care For members whose last enrollment start date is less than 42 days prior to delivery, should we include prenatal visits that occur after the delivery date but within 42 days after the enrollment start date?

No. The intent is to only count prenatal visits, which by definition can only occur prior to delivery. Do not count visits that occur on or after the date of delivery for the Timeliness of Prenatal Care indicator.

HEDIS 2020

1.15.2020 Controlling High Blood Pressure The CBP measure lists the following exclusions in the eligible population:

• Medicare members 66 years of age and older as of December 31 of the measurement year who meet either of the following:
– Enrolled in an Institutional SNP (I-SNP) any time during the measurement year.
– Living long-term in an institution any time during the measurement year as identified by the LTI flag in the Monthly Membership Detail Data File. Use the run date of the file to determine if a member had an LTI flag during the measurement year.

Should these exclusions be removed from the CBP measure specifications?

 Yes. Remove the bullets that include I-SNP and LTI exclusions for Medicare members from the specifications. They are not intended for the Exchange population.

Exchange 2020