Cheap generic cialis

Low grade intraventricular haemorrhage and cerebral palsyNicky Hollebrandse and http://arif.eu/how-much-does-generic-cialis-cost/ colleagues describe the neurodevelopmental outcomes at 8 years of almost 500 extremely preterm infants cheap generic cialis born before 28 week’s gestation and relate these to the presence and severity of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) that was identified in the newborn period. It is particularly valuable that they achieved 91.4% follow-up of so many patients and to an age when assessments can be more detailed. When no IVH was identified, cerebral palsy was observed in 8% of the infants cheap generic cialis and impaired academic ability in 16%.

With grade 1 and 2 IVH, cerebral palsy increased to 15% and 18% respectively, with no increase in the risk of impaired cognitive outcomes. With more severe IVH, risks of cerebral palsy and cognitive impairment increased further. Around 5% of the infants with grade 1 and cheap generic cialis 2 IVH developed cystic periventricular leukomalacia (PVL) later.

The authors did not control for this and they considered it possible that IVH could be part of the causal pathway for this lesion. The infants did not have MRI scans. Later ultrasound detectable PVL could account for some but not most of the cheap generic cialis observed cerebral palsy in infants with low grade IVH.

Nohaa Gorma and Stephen Miller highlight the prime importance of school age outcomes over earlier measures. They emphasise the need to investigate interventions during and beyond the neonatal period, including the social environment and support provided to families, if we are to optimise the outcomes for cheap generic cialis these children. See pages F4 and F2Diffuse excessive high signal intensity (DEHSI) on term equivalent MRI scan is not predictive of later cognitive abnormality or cerebral palsyThere have been a number of papers in the journal recently looking at the relationship between MRI scan findings at term and outcome in preterm infants.

Chandra Prakash Rath and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies evaluating the significance of DEHSI. They included 1832 preterm infants who had MRI cheap generic cialis scans at term equivalent age and assessments of cognitive ability and cerebral palsy using validated instruments. At 1 year of age or older.

DEHSI was common and was not a useful predictor of either cognitive outcome or cerebral palsy. See page F9Opaque wraps and pulse oximeter readingsPrakash Kannan Loganathan cheap generic cialis and colleagues investigated whether the use of an opaque wrap over the pulse oximeter probe affected the performance of the pulse oximeter in 96 clinically stable newborn infants. They were interested in the speed with which the oximeter displayed valid data and the distribution of the SpO2 readings obtained.

They evaluated this for Masimo and Nellcor cheap generic cialis oximeters. The use of the opaque wrap had no important effect on the performance of either oximeter type. For the study period the infants were monitored simultaneously using both a Nellcor and a Masimo oximter, permitting a comparison of the readings between the two devices as an interesting additional finding.

The mean SpO2 obtained with the Masimo oximiter was 2.85% higher than the cheap generic cialis mean SpO2 simultaneously obtained with the Nellcor oximeter. The infants were clinically stable and this difference was observed when readings were typically in the low to mid 90 s. Both devices are providing an estimate of the arterial oxygen saturation and neither should be considered a gold standard over the other.

However a difference in the apparent calibration of the two devices of this magnitude demonstrated in a cheap generic cialis reasonably large comparison in the key region of clinical interest for newborn infants could have important clinical implications as the devices are used interchangeably for a range of clinical indications related to specific SpO2 ranges. See page F57Preterm births during lockdownGitte Hedermann and colleagues were among the first to report observational data from the erectile dysfunction treatment lockdown period suggesting a reduction in the number of extremely preterm births. In comparison with the same time cheap generic cialis period during the preceding 5 years there were significantly fewer extremely preterm deliveries in Denmark during lockdown, with no change in total deliveries.

Similar observations have been reported from elsewhere and raise questions about the contributing factors, which will be a rich source of new research as larger population datasets become available for analysis. Wouldn’t it be nice if slowing the pace of life for pregnant women is enough to improve pregnancy outcomes?. It is unlikely that the findings will be the same in all datasets because the degree of lockdown will be variable and the extent to which important healthcare delivery is cheap generic cialis disrupted could have an adverse impact.

See page F93Fetal haemoglobin levels and bronchopulmonary dysplasiaWilliam Hellstrom and colleagues analysed the fetal haemoglobin (HbF) levels on almost 12 000 blood gas samples taken during the first week of life in 452 preterm infants born before 30 week’s gestation. They found that infants whose HbF levels fell the most during week one after birth were at highest risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). They also analysed arterial PO2 cheap generic cialis levels and these were significantly lower in the infants who developed BPD, suggesting that the observation does not relate to simply to an effect mediated through changes in oxygenation.

They hypothesise that the higher falls in HbF reflect sampling losses and replacement by transfusion and that there is a loss of endogenous blood components that are essential for normal organ development, such as insulin-like growth factor 1. The authors are investigating the potential beneficial role of minimising the loss of endogenous blood components in an ongoing multicentre randomised trial using microsampling methods to greatly reduce cheap generic cialis sampling losses. See page F88Bowel ultrasound in the management of necrotising enterocolitisKaren Alexander and Colleagues provide a comprehensive overview of the use of bowel ultrasound scanning in the investigation and management of infants with suspected or confirmed necrotising enterocolitis.

There are lots of images of key features and the article will be of value to anyone increasing their use of this technique or introducing it. See page F96Despite significant advances in perinatal and neonatal care, intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH)—bleeding from blood vessels within the germinal matrix of the developing brain into the ventricular system—continues to affect 15%–20% of very preterm neonates and 45% of those born extremely preterm (EP).1 More than half of very preterm neonates will exhibit neurodevelopmental challenges as a consequence of IVH that cheap generic cialis range widely in severity across motor and cognitive domains.2 Such disabilities place a significant toll on affected children and their families, as well as on the education and healthcare system, highlighting the need for timely interventions in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and beyond.The study reported by Hollebrandse et al3 assesses the relationship between IVH and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 8 years of age in children born EP, using a population-based sample of 546 EP neonates and 679 matched term-born controls. This cohort is distinguished by remarkably high follow-up rates from three different timepoints.

In their study, Hollebrandse et al raise three critical issues in the investigation of the impact of IVH on neurodevelopmental outcomes. First is the importance of cheap generic cialis the age at which neurodevelopmental assessment occurs and its implications to understanding the long-term impacts of IVH. Second is the extent to which different grades of IVH contribute to the spectrum of neurodevelopmental outcomes.

Third is identifying interventions within NICU practice and postdischarge that can help mitigate the adverse impacts of IVH with attention to the timepoints at which these therapies are most supportive of neurodevelopmental outcomes.The age at which neurodevelopmental ….

Cialis and bph

	Cialis	Zenegra	Fildena extra power	Viagra with fluoxetine
Can cause heart attack	60mg	100mg	150mg
Where to buy	Nearby pharmacy	Online Pharmacy	Nearby pharmacy	Pharmacy
Duration of action	18h	16h	3h	17h
Can women take	In online pharmacy	No	In online pharmacy	Register first

Start Preamble cialis and bph this content Census Bureau, Commerce. Notice of information collection. Request for cialis and bph comment. The Department of Commerce, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden.

The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 60 days of public comment on a proposed new information collection, the Management and cialis and bph Organizational Practices Survey—Hospitals (MOPS-HP). An information collection request (ICR) for the MOPS-HP was submitted to OMB for approval on July 7, 2020 and is currently pending OMB review. To ensure consideration, comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before January 19, 2021. Interested persons are cialis and bph invited to submit written comments by email to Thomas.J.Smith@census.gov.

Please reference Management and Organizational Practices Survey—Hospitals (MOPS-HP) in the subject line of your comments. You may also submit comments, identified by Docket Number USBC-2020-0029, to the Federal cialis and bph e-Rulemaking Portal. Http://www.regulations.gov. All comments received are part of the public record.

No comments will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov for public viewing until after the comment period has cialis and bph closed. Comments will generally be posted without change. All Personally Identifiable Information (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible cialis and bph. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats. Start Further Info Requests for additional information or specific questions related to collection activities should cialis and bph be directed to Edward Watkins at edward.e.watkins.iii@census.gov or 301-763-4750. End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information I. Abstract The cialis and bph U.S.

Census Bureau plans to conduct the Management and Organizational Practices Survey-Hospitals (MOPS-HP) for survey year 2020 as a joint project with Harvard Business School. The MOPS-HP will utilize a subset of the Service Annual Survey mail-out sample and will collect data on management practices from Chief Nursing cialis and bph Officers (CNOs) at general medical and surgical hospitals to assist in studying their relationship to clinical and financial performance. A notice seeking public comment on our plans to conduct this survey was previously published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2020, on pages 4623-4624. That notice proposed collecting data for survey years 2019 and 2014, but collection has been adjusted due to the ongoing erectile dysfunction cialis.

The cialis cialis and bph has further highlighted the relevance of hospital management practices, especially as they relate to hospitals' abilities to respond to shocks to their organization and the health care system. In light of this, the Census Bureau has modified the survey proposal to collect data for reference years 2020 and 2019. This change seeks to directly measure cialis and bph management practices and protocols before and during the cialis to obtain a better understanding of how hospitals have had to adjust and pivot operations during this public health emergency. The Census Bureau also plans to include two additional questions in the MOPS-HP content to help improve measurement of hospital preparedness.

These questions will provide information on two elements of responsiveness, hospitals' coordinated deployment of frontline clinical workers and hospitals' ability to quickly respond to needed changes in standardized clinical protocols. In an effort to limit respondent burden while adding this content, cialis and bph adjustments were made to keep the total number of questions and estimated burden per response unchanged. The project plan, schedule, and collection strategy are being actively monitored, and adjustments will be made as necessary, as the Census Bureau is cognizant and respectful of the time, resources, and burden placed on CNOs during the cialis. After the close of this second comment period, the Census Bureau will submit cialis and bph these planned changes as an amendment to the ICR, which is currently pending review at OMB.

Any comments received by the close of the comment period will be summarized and included in the amendment. Currently, no official statistics on management practices in hospitals exist. Past research shows these practices are related cialis and bph to health care providers' clinical and financial outcomes. This suggests that providing measures on management practices may potentially help the United States health care system, which is challenged by rising health care costs, increased demand from an aging society, and quality objectives.

These data would permit users to examine relationships between management practices and financial outcomes using Census Bureau data cialis and bph (e.g., revenues) and relationships with clinical outcomes using external data sources. Additionally, these data would provide hospital administrators and managers information to evaluate their practices in comparison to other hospitals at an aggregate level. The MOPS-HP content was proposed by external researchers with past experience in surveying hospitals cialis and bph on management practices. Some questions are adapted from the Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS), conducted in the manufacturing sector, allowing for inter-sectoral comparisons.

Content for the MOPS-HP includes performance monitoring, financial and clinical targets, and incentives. The 39 questions are grouped into cialis and bph the following sections. Tenure, Management Practices, Management Training, Management of Team Interactions, Staffing and Allocation of Human Resources, Standardized Clinical Protocols, Documentation of Patients' Medical Records, and Organizational Characteristics.Start Printed Page 73674 II. Method of Collection The MOPS-HP sample will cialis and bph consist of approximately 3,200 hospital locations for enterprises classified under General Medical and Surgical Hospitals (NAICS 6221) and sampled in the Service Annual Survey (SAS).

The survey will be mailed separately from the 2020 SAS and collected electronically through the Census Bureau's Centurion online reporting system. Respondents will be sent an initial letter with instructions detailing how to log into the instrument and report their information. These letters will cialis and bph be addressed to the location's CNO. In instances where the CNO is not identifiable, the letter will be addressed to the hospital's administrative office with attention to the CNO.

Collection is scheduled to begin in the initial months of 2021 cialis and bph. III. Data OMB Control Number. 0607-XXXX.

Form Number(s). MP-2000. Type of Review. Regular submission, New Information Collection Request.

Affected Public. General medical and surgical hospitals. Estimated Number of Respondents. Approximately 3,200.

Estimated Time per Response. 45 minutes. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours. 2,400.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public. $0. (This is not the cost of respondents' time, but the indirect costs respondents may incur for such things as purchases of specialized software or hardware needed to report, or expenditures for accounting or records maintenance services required specifically by the collection.) Respondent's Obligation. Mandatory.

Legal Authority. Title 13 U.S.C., Sections 131 and 182. IV. Request for Comments We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department/Bureau to.

(a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility. (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. And (d) Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include, or summarize, each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Start Signature Sheleen Dumas, Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Commerce Department. End Signature End Supplemental Information [FR Doc. 2020-25580 Filed 11-18-20. 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510-07-PStart Preamble Department of Veterans Affairs.

Interim final rule. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is issuing this interim final rule to confirm that its health care professionals may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. Specifically, this rulemaking confirms VA's current practice of allowing VA health care professionals to deliver health care services in a State other than the health care professional's State of licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirement, thereby enhancing beneficiaries' access to critical VA health care services. This rulemaking also confirms VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professionals which will standardize a health care professional's practice in all VA medical facilities.

Effective Date. This rule is effective on November 12, 2020. Comments. Comments must be received on or before January 11, 2021.

Comments may be submitted through www.Regulations.gov or mailed to, Beth Taylor, 10A1, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to [“RIN 2900-AQ94—Authority of VA Professionals to Practice Health Care.”] Comments received will be available at regulations.gov for public viewing, inspection, or copies. Start Further Info Beth Taylor, Chief Nursing Officer, Veterans Health Administration. 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-7250.

(This is not a toll-free number.) End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the erectile dysfunction treatment outbreak to be a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. On January 31, 2020, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services declared a Public Health Emergency pursuant to 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 247d, for the entire United States to aid in the nation's health care community response to the erectile dysfunction treatment outbreak. On March 11, 2020, in light of new data and the rapid spread in Europe, WHO declared erectile dysfunction treatment to be a cialis. On March 13, 2020, the President declared a National Emergency due to erectile dysfunction treatment under sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C.

1601 et seq.) and consistent with section 1135 of the Social Security Act (SSA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 1320b-5). As a result of responding to the needs of our veteran population and other non-veteran beneficiaries during the erectile dysfunction treatment National Emergency, where VA has had to shift health care Start Printed Page 71839professionals to other locations or duties to assist in the care of those affected by this cialis, VA has become acutely aware of the need to promulgate this rule to clarify the policies governing VA's provision of health care. This rule is intended to confirm that VA health care professionals may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice.

In particular, it will confirm (1) VA's continuing practice of authorizing VA health care professionals to deliver health care services in a State other than the health care professional's State of licensure, registration, certification, or other requirement. And (2) VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professions via policy, which will govern their employment, subject only to State laws where the health care professional is licensed, credentialed, registered, or subject to some other State requirements that do not unduly interfere with those duties. We note that the term State as it applies to this rule means each of the several States, Territories, and possessions of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a political subdivision of such State. This definition is consistent with the term State as it is defined in 38 U.S.C.

101(20). A conflicting State law is one that would unduly interfere with the fulfillment of a VA health care professional's Federal duties. We note that the policies and practices confirmed in this rule only apply to VA health care professionals appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S.

Code, which does not include contractors working in VA medical facilities or those working in the community. VA has long understood its governing statutory authorities to permit VA to engage in these practices. Section 7301(b) of title 38 the U.S. Code establishes that the primary function of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) within VA is to provide a complete medical and hospital service for the medical care and treatment of veterans.

To allow VHA to carry out its medical care mission, Congress established a comprehensive personnel system for certain VA health care professionals, independent of the civil service rules. See Chapters 73-74 of title 38 of the U.S. Code. Congress granted the Secretary express statutory authority to establish the qualifications for VA's health care professionals, determine the hours and conditions of employment, take disciplinary action against employees, and otherwise regulate the professional activities of those individuals.

38 U.S.C. 7401-7464. Section 7402 of 38 U.S.C. Establishes the qualifications of appointees.

To be eligible for appointment as a VA employee in a health care profession covered by section 7402(b) (other than a medical facility Director appointed under section 7402(b)(4)), most individuals, after appointment, must, among other requirements, be licensed, registered, or certified to practice their profession in a State, or satisfy some other State requirement. However, the standards prescribed in section 7402(b) establish only the basic qualifications for VA health care professionals and do not limit the Secretary from establishing other qualifications or rules for health care professionals. In addition, the Secretary is responsible for the control, direction, and management of the Department, including agency personnel and management matters. See 38 U.S.C.

303. Such authorities permit the Secretary to further regulate the health care professions to make certain that VA's health care system provides safe and effective health care by qualified health care professionals to ensure the well-being of those veterans who have borne the battle. In this rulemaking, VA is detailing its authority to manage its health care professionals by stating that they may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other State requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. VA believes that this is necessary in order to provide additional protection for VA health care professionals against adverse State actions proposed or taken against them when they are practicing within the scope of their VA employment, particularly when they are practicing across State lines or when they are performing duties consistent with a VA national standard of practice for their health care profession.

Practice Across State Lines Historically, VA has operated as a national health care system that authorizes VA health care professionals to practice in any State as long as they have a valid license, registration, certification, or fulfill other State requirements in at least one State. In doing so, VA health care professionals have been practicing within the scope of their VA employment regardless of any unduly burdensome State requirements that would restrict practice across State lines. We note, however, that VA may only hire health care professionals who are licensed, registered, certified, or satisfy some other requirement in a State, unless the statute requires or provides otherwise (e.g., 38 U.S.C. 7402(b)(14)).

The erectile dysfunction treatment cialis has highlighted VA's acute need to exercise its statutory authority of allowing VA health care professionals to practice across State lines. In response to the cialis, VA needed to and continues to need to move health care professionals quickly across the country to care for veterans and other beneficiaries and not have State licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirements hinder such actions. Put simply, it is crucial for VA to be able to determine the location and practice of its VA health care professionals to carry out its mission without any unduly burdensome restrictions imposed by State licensure, registration, certification, or other requirements. This rulemaking will support VA's authority to do so and will provide an increased level of protection against any adverse State action being proposed or taken against VA health care professionals who practice within the scope of their VA employment.

Since the start of the cialis, in furtherance of VA's Fourth Mission, VA has rapidly utilized its resources to assist parts of the country that are undergoing serious and critical shortages of health care resources. VA's Fourth Mission is to improve the Nation's preparedness for response to war, terrorism, national emergencies, and natural disasters by developing plans and taking actions to ensure continued service to veterans, as well as to support national, State, and local emergency management, public health, safety and homeland security efforts. VA has deployed personnel to support other VA medical facilities that have been impacted by erectile dysfunction treatment as well as provided support to State and community nursing homes. As of July 2020, VA has deployed personnel to more than 45 States.

VA utilized the Disaster Emergency Medical Personnel System (DEMPS), VA's main deployment program, for VA health care professionals to travel to locations deemed as national emergency or disaster areas, to help provide health care services in places such as New Orleans, Louisiana, and New York City, New York. As of June 2020, a total of 1,893 staff have been mobilized to meet the needs of our facilities and Fourth Start Printed Page 71840Mission requests during the cialis. VA deployed 877 staff to meet Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mission requests, 420 health care professionals were deployed as DEMPS response, 414 employees were mobilized to cross level staffing needs within their Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), 69 employees were mobilized to support needs in another VISN, and 113 Travel Nurse Corps staff responded specifically for erectile dysfunction treatment staffing support. In light of the rapidly changing landscape of the cialis, it is crucial for VA to be able to move its health care professionals quickly across the country to assist when a new hot spot emerges without fear of any adverse action from a State be proposed or taken against a VA health care professional.

We note that, in addition to providing in person health care across State lines during the cialis, VA also provides telehealth across State lines. VA's video to home services have been heavily leveraged during the cialis to deliver safe, quality VA health care while adhering to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) physical distancing guidelines. Video visits to veterans' homes or other offsite location have increased from 41,425 in February 2020 to 657,423 in July of 2020. This represents a 1,478 percent utilization increase.

VA has specific statutory authority under 38 U.S.C. 1730C to allow health care professionals to practice telehealth in any State regardless of where they are licensed, registered, certified, or satisfy some other State requirement. This rulemaking is consistent with Congressional intent under Public Law 115-185, sec. 151, June 6, 2018, codified at 38 U.S.C.

1730C for all VA health care professionals to practice across State lines regardless of the location of where they provide health care. This rulemaking will ensure that VA professionals are protected regardless of how they provide health care, whether it be via telehealth or in-person. Beyond the current need to mobilize health care resources quickly to different parts of the country, this practice of allowing VA health care professionals to practice across State lines optimizes the VA health care workforce to meet the needs of all VA beneficiaries year-round. It is common practice within the VA health care system to have primary and specialty health care professionals routinely travel to smaller VA medical facilities or rural locations in nearby States to provide care that may be difficult to obtain or unavailable in that community.

As of January 14, 2020, out of 182,100 licensed health care professionals who are employed by VA, 25,313 or 14 percent do not hold a State license, registration, or certification in the same State as their main VA medical facility. This number does not include the VA health care professionals who practice at a main VA medical facility in one State where they are licensed, registered, certified, or hold some other State requirement, but also practice at a nearby Community Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC) in a neighboring State where they do not hold such credentials. Indeed, 49 out of the 140 VA medical facilities nationwide have one or more sites of care in a different State than the main VA medical facility. Also, VA has rural mobile health units that provide health care services to veterans who have difficulty accessing VA health care facilities.

These mobile units are a vital source of health care to veterans who live in rural and medically underserved communities. Some of the services provided by the mobile units include, but are not limited to, health care screening, mental health outreach, influenza and pneumonia vaccinations, and routine primary care. The rural mobile health units are an integral part of VA's goal of encouraging healthier communities and support VA's preventative health programs. Health care professionals who provide health care in these mobile units may provide services in various States where they may not hold a license, registration, or certification, or satisfy some other State requirement.

It is critical that these health care professionals are protected from any adverse State action proposed or taken when performing these crucial services. In addition, the practice of health care professionals of providing health care across State lines also gives VA the flexibility to hire qualified health care professionals from any State to meet the staffing needs of a VA health care facility where recruitment or retention is difficult. As of December 31, 2019, VA had approximately 13,000 vacancies for health care professions across the country. As a national health care system, it is imperative for VA to be able to recruit and retain health care professionals, where recruitment and retention is difficult, to ensure there is access to health care regardless of where the VA beneficiary resides.

Permitting VA health care professionals to practice across State lines is an important incentive when trying to recruit for these vacancies, particularly during a cialis, where private health care facilities have greater flexibility to offer more competitive pay and benefits. This is also especially beneficial in recruiting spouses of active service members who frequently move across the country. National Standard of Practice This rulemaking also confirms VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professions. We note that this rulemaking does not create any such national standards.

All national standards of practice will be created via policy. For the purposes of this rulemaking, a national standard of practice describes the tasks and duties that a VA health care professional practicing in the health care profession may perform and may be permitted to undertake. Having a national standard of practice means that individuals from the same VA health care profession may provide the same type of tasks and duties regardless of the VA medical facility where they are located or the State license, registration, certification, or other State requirement they hold. We emphasize that VA will determine, on an individual basis, that a health care professional has the necessary education, training, and skills to perform the tasks and duties detailed in the national standard of practice.

The need for national standards of practice have been highlighted by VA's large-scale initiative regarding the new electronic health record (EHR). VA's health care system is currently undergoing a transformational initiative to modernize the system by replacing its current EHR with a joint EHR with Department of Defense (DoD) to promote interoperability of medical data between VA and DoD. VA's new EHR system will provide VA and DoD health care professionals with quick and efficient access to the complete picture of a veteran's health information, improving VA's delivery of health care to our nation's veterans. For this endeavor, DoD and VA established a joint governance over the EHR system.

In order to be successful, VA must standardize clinical processes with DoD. This means that all health care professionals in DoD and VA who practice in a certain health care profession must be able to carry out the same duties and tasks irrespective of State requirements. The reason why this is important is because each health care profession is designated a role in the EHR system that sets forth specific privileges within the EHR that dictate allowed tasks for such profession. These tasks include, but are not limited to, dispensing and administrating medications.

Prescriptive practices. Ordering of procedures and diagnostic imaging. And required level of oversight. VA has the ability to modify these privileges within EHR, however, VA Start Printed Page 71841cannot do so on an individual user level, but rather at the role level for each health care profession.

In other words, VA cannot modify the privileges for all health care professionals in one State to be consistent with that State's requirements. Instead, the privileges can only be modified for every health care professional in that role across all States. Therefore, the privileges established within EHR cannot be made facility or State specific. In order to achieve standardized clinical processes, VA and DoD must create the uniform standards of practice for each health care specialty.

Currently, DoD has specific authority from Congress to create national standards of practice for their health care professionals under 10 U.S.C. 1094. While VA lacks a similarly specific statute, VA has the general statutory authority, as explained above, to regulate its health care professionals and authorize health care practices that preempt conflicting State law. This regulation will confirm VA's authority to do so.

Absent such standardized practices, it will be incredibly difficult for VA to achieve its goal of being an active participant in EHR modernization because either some VA health care professionals would fear potential adverse State actions or DoD and VA would need to agree upon roles that are consistent with the most restrictive States' requirements to ensure that all health care professionals are acting within the scope of their State requirements. VA believes that agreement upon roles that are consistent with the most restrictive State is not an acceptable option because it will lead to delayed care and consequently decreased access and level of health care for VA beneficiaries. One example that impacts multiple health care professions throughout the VA system is the ability to administer medication without a provider (physician or advanced practice nurse practitioner) co-signature. As it pertains to nursing, almost all States permit nurses to follow a protocol.

However, some States, such as New York, North Carolina, and South Carolina, do not permit nurses to follow a protocol without a provider co-signature. A protocol is a standing order that has been approved by medical and clinical leadership if a certain sequence of health care events occur. For instance, if a patient is exhibiting certain signs of a heart attack, there is a protocol in place to administer potentially life-saving medication. If the nurse is the first person to see the signs, the nurse will follow the approved protocol and immediately administer the medication.

However, if the nurse cannot follow the protocol and requires a provider co-signature, administration of the medication will be delayed until a provider is able to co-sign the order, which may lead to the deterioration of the patient's condition. This also increases the provider's workload and decreases the amount of time the provider can spend with patients. Historically, VA physical therapists (PTs), occupational therapists, and speech therapists were routinely able to determine the need to administer topical medications during therapy sessions and were able to administer the topical without a provider co-signature. However, in order to accommodate the new EHR system and variance in State requirements, these therapists would need to place an order for all medications, including topicals, which would leave these therapists waiting for a provider co-signature in the middle of a therapy session, thus delaying care.

Furthermore, these therapists also routinely ordered imaging to better assess the clinical needs of the patient, but would also have to wait for a provider co-signature, which will further delay care and increase provider workload. In addition to requiring provider co-signatures, there will also be a significant decrease in access to care due to other variances in State requirements. For instance, direct access to PTs will be limited in order to ensure that the role is consistent with all State requirements. Direct access means that a beneficiary may request PT services without a provider's referral.

However, while almost half of the States allow unrestricted direct access to PTs, over half of the States have some limitations on requesting PT services. For instance, in Alabama, a licensed PT may perform an initial evaluation and may only provide other services as delineated in specific subdivisions of the Alabama Physical Therapy Practice Act. Furthermore, in New York, PT treatment may be rendered by a licensed PT for 10 visits or 30 days, whichever shall occur first, without a referral from a physician, dentist, podiatrist, nurse practitioner, or licensed midwife. This is problematic as VA will not be able to allow for direct access due to these variances and direct access has been shown to be beneficial for patient care.

Currently, VISN 23 is completing a two-year strategic initiative to implement direct access and have PTs embedded into patient aligned care teams (PACT). Outcomes thus far include decreased wait times, improved veteran satisfaction, improved provider satisfaction, and improved functional outcomes. Therefore, VA will confirm its authority to ensure that health care professionals are protected against State action when they adhere to VA's national standards of practice. We reiterate that this rulemaking does not establish national standards of practice for each health care profession, but merely confirms VA's authority to do so, thereby preempting any State restrictions that unduly interfere with those practices.

The actual national standards of practice will be developed in subregulatory policy for each health care profession. As such, VA will make a concerted effort to engage appropriate stakeholders when developing the national standards of practice. Preemption As previously explained, in this rulemaking, VA is confirming its authority to manage its health care professionals. Specifically, this rulemaking will confirm VA's long-standing practice of allowing its health care professionals to practice in a State where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or satisfy some other State requirement.

The rule will also confirm that VA health care professionals must adhere to VA's national standards of practice, as determined by VA policy, irrespective of conflicting State licensing, registration, certification, or other State requirements that unduly burden that practice. We do note that VA health care professionals will only be required to perform tasks and duties to the extent of their education, skill, and training. For instance, VA would not require a registered nurse to perform a task that the individual nurse was not trained to perform. Currently, practice in accordance with VA employment, including practice across State lines or adhering to a VA standard of practice, may jeopardize VA health care professionals' credentials or result in fines and imprisonment for unauthorized health care practice.

This is because most States have restrictions that limit health care professionals' practice or have rules that prohibit health care professionals from furnishing health care services within that State without a license, registration, certification, or other requirement from that State. We note that, some States, for example Rhode Island, Utah, and Michigan, have enacted legislation or regulations that specifically allow certain VA health care professionals to practice in those States when they do not hold a State license. Several VA health care professionals have already had actions proposed or taken against them by various States Start Printed Page 71842while practicing health care within the scope of their VA employment, while they either practiced in a State where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or other State requirement that unduly interfered with their VA employment. In one instance, a VA psychologist was licensed in California but was employed and providing supervision of a trainee at the VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Nashville, Tennessee.

California psychology licensing laws require supervisors to hold a license from the State where they are practicing and do not allow for California licensed psychologists to provide supervision to trainees or unlicensed psychologists outside the State of California. The California State Psychology Licensing Board proposed sanctions and fines of $1,000 for violating section 1387.4(a) of the CA Code of Regulations (CCR). The VA system did not qualify for the exemption of out of State supervision requirements listed in CCR section 1387.4. In addition, a VA physician who was licensed in Oregon, but was practicing at a VAMC in Biloxi, Mississippi had the status of their license changed from active to inactive because the Oregon Medical Board determined the professional did not reside in Oregon, in violation of Oregon's requirement that a physician physically reside in the State in order to maintain an active license.

This rulemaking serves to preempt State requirements, such as the ones discussed above, that were or can be used to take an action against VA health care professionals for practicing within the scope of their VA employment. State licensure, registration, certification, and other State requirements are preempted to the extent such State laws unduly interfere with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment. As explained above, Congress provided general statutory provisions that permit the VA Secretary to authorize health care practices by health care professionals at VA, which serve to preempt conflicting State laws that unduly interfere with the exercise of health care by VA health care professionals pursuant to that authorization. Although some VA health care professionals are required by Federal statute to have a State license, see, e.g., 38 U.S.C.

7402(b)(1)(C) (providing that, to be eligible to be appointed to a physician position at the VA, a physician must be licensed to practice medicine, surgery, or osteopathy in a State), a State may not attach a condition to the license that is unduly burdensome to or unduly interferes with the practice of health care within the scope of VA employment. Under well-established interpretations of the Supremacy Clause, Federal laws and policies authorizing VA health care professionals to practice according to VA standards preempt conflicting State law. That is, a State law that prevents or unreasonably interferes with the performance of VA duties. See, e.g., Hancock v.

Train, 426 U.S. 167, 178-81 generic daily cialis online (1976). Sperry v. Florida, 373 U.S.

379, 385 (1963). Miller v. Arkansas, 352 U.S. 187 (1956).

Ohio v. Thomas, 173 U.S. 276, 282-84 (1899). State Bar Disciplinary Rules as Applied to Federal Government Attorneys, 9 Op.

O.L.C. 71, 72-73 (1985). When a State law does not conflict with the performance of Federal duties in these ways, VA health care professionals are required to abide by the State law. Therefore, VA's policies and regulations will preempt State licensure, registration, and certification laws, rules, or other requirements only to the extent they conflict with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment.

We emphasize that, in instances where there is no conflict with State requirements, VA health care professionals should abide by the State requirement. For example, if a State license requires a health care professional to have a certain number of hours of continuing professional education per year to maintain their license, the health care professional must adhere to this State requirement if it does not prevent or unduly interfere with the exercise of VA employment. To determine whether a State requirement is conflicting, VA would assess whether the State law unduly interferes on a case-by-case basis. For instance, if Oregon requires all licensed physicians to reside in Oregon, VA would likely find that it unduly interferes with already licensed VA physicians who reside and work for VA in the State of Mississippi.

We emphasize that the intent of the regulation is to only preempt State requirements that are unduly burdensome and interfere with a VA health care professionals' practice for the VA. For instance, it would not require a State to issue a license to an individual who does not meet the education requirements to receive a license in that State. We note that this rulemaking also does not affect VA's existing requirement that all VA health care professionals adhere to restrictions imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.

And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300, et seq., to prescribe or administer controlled substances. Any preemption of conflicting State requirements will be the minimum necessary for VA to effectively furnish health care services. It would be costly and time-consuming for VA to lobby each State board for each health care profession specialty to remove restrictions that impair VA's ability to furnish health care services to beneficiaries and then wait for the State to implement appropriate changes. Doing so would not guarantee a successful result.

Regulation For these reasons, VA is establishing a new regulation titled Health care professionals' practice in VA, which will be located at 38 CFR 17.419. This rule will confirm the ability of VA health care professionals to practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. Subsection (a) of § 17.419 contains the definitions that will apply to the new section. Subsection (a)(1) contains the definition for beneficiary.

We are defining the term beneficiary to mean a veteran or any other individual receiving health care under title 38 of the U.S. Code. We are using this definition because VA provides health care to veterans, certain family members of veterans, servicemembers, and others. This is VA's standard use of this term.

Subsection (a)(2) contains the definition for health care professional. We are defining the term health care professional to be an individual who meets specific criteria that is listed below. Subsection (a)(2)(i) will require that a health care professional be appointed to an occupation in VHA that is listed or authorized under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S.

Code. Subsection (a)(2)(ii) requires that the individual is not a VA-contracted health care professional. A health care professional does not include a contractor or a community health care professional because they are not considered VA employees nor appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S.

Code. Subsection (a)(2)(iii) lists the required qualifications for a health care professional. We note that these qualifications do not include all general Start Printed Page 71843qualifications for appointment, such as to hold a degree of doctor of medicine. These qualifications are related to licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirements.

Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A) states that the health care professional must have an active, current, full, and unrestricted license, registration, certification, or satisfies another State requirement in a State to practice the health care specialty identified under 38 U.S.C. 7402(b). This standard ensures that VA health care professionals are qualified to practice their individual health care specialty if the specialty requires such credential. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(B) states that the individual has other qualifications as prescribed by the Secretary for one of the health care professions listed under 38 U.S.C.

7402(b). Some health care professionals appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7401(3) whose qualifications are listed in 38 U.S.C. 7402(b) are not required to meet State license, registration, certification, or other requirements and rely on the qualifications prescribed by the Secretary.

Therefore, these individuals would be included in this subsection and required to have the qualifications prescribed by the Secretary for their health care profession. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(C) states that the individual is otherwise authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services. This would include those individuals who practice a health care profession that does not require a State license, registration, certification, or other requirement and is also not listed in 38 U.S.C. 7402(b), but is authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services.

Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D) includes individuals who are trainees or may have a time limited appointment to finish clinicals or other requirements prior to being fully licensed. Therefore, the regulation will state that the individual is under the clinical supervision of a health care professional that meets the requirements listed in subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A)-(C) and the individual must meet the requirements in subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(i) or (a)(2)(iii)(D)(ii). Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(i) states that the individual is a health professions trainee appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7405 or 7406 participating in clinical or research training under supervision to satisfy program or degree requirements.

Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(ii) states that the individual is a health care employee, appointed under title 5 of the U.S. Code, 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3), or 38 U.S.C. 7405 for any category of personnel described in 38 U.S.C.

7401(1) or (3) who must obtain an active, current, full and unrestricted licensure, registration, or certification or meet the qualification standards as defined by the Secretary within the specified time frame. These individuals have a time-limited appointment to obtain credentials. For example, marriage and family therapists require a certain number of supervised clinical post-graduate hours prior to receiving their license. Lastly, as we previously discussed in this rulemaking, we are defining the term State in subsection (a)(3) as the term is defined in 38 U.S.C.

101(20), and also including political subdivisions of such States. This is consistent with the definition of State in 38 U.S.C. 1730C(f) which is VA's statutory authority to preempt State law when the covered health care professional is using telehealth to provide treatment to an individual under this title. We believe that it is important to define the term in the same way as it is defined for health care professionals practicing via telehealth so that way it is consistent regardless of whether the health care professional is practicing in-person or via telehealth.

Moreover, as subdivisions of a State are granted legal authority from the State itself, it makes sense to subject entities created by a State, or authorized by a State to create themselves, to be subject to the same limitations and restrictions as the State itself. Section 17.419(b) details that VA health care professionals must practice within the scope of their Federal employment irrespective of conflicting State requirements that would prevent or unduly interfere with the exercise of Federal duties. This provision confirms that VA health care professionals may furnish health care consistent with their VA employment obligations without fear of adverse action proposed or taken by any State. In order to clarify and make transparent how VA utilizes or intends to utilize our current statutory authority, we are providing a non-exhaustive list of examples.

The first example is listed in subsection (b)(1)(i). It states that a health care professional may practice their VA health care profession in any State irrespective of the State where they hold a valid license, registration, certification, or other qualification. The second example is listed in subsection (b)(1)(ii). It states that a health care professional may practice their VA health care profession consistent with the VA national standard of practice as determined by VA.

As previously explained, VA intends to establish national standards of practice via VA policy. A health care professional's practice within VA will continue to be subject to the limitations imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801, et seq. And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300, et seq., on the authority to prescribe or administer controlled substances, as well as any other limitations on the provision of VA care set forth in applicable Federal law and policy.

This will ensure that professionals are still in compliance with critical laws concerning the prescribing and administering of controlled substances. This requirement is stated in subsection (b)(2). Subsection (c) expressly states the intended preemptive effect of § 17.419, to ensure that conflicting State and local laws, rules, regulations, and requirements related to health care professionals' practice will have no force or effect when such professionals are practicing health care while working within the scope of their VA employment. In circumstances where there is a conflict between Federal and State law, Federal law would prevail in accordance with Article VI, clause 2, of the U.S.

Constitution. Executive Order 13132 establishes principles for preemption of State law when it is implicated in rulemaking or proposed legislation. Where a Federal statute does not expressly preempt State law, agencies shall construe any authorization in the statute for the issuance of regulations as authorizing preemption of State law by rulemaking only when the exercise of State authority directly conflicts with the exercise of Federal authority or there is clear evidence to conclude that the Congress intended the agency to have the authority to preempt State law. In this situation, the Federal statutes do not expressly preempt State laws.

However, VA construes the authorization established in 38 U.S.C. 303, 501, and 7401-7464 as authorizing preemption because the exercise of State authority directly conflicts with the exercise of Federal authority under these statutes. Congress granted the Secretary express statutory authority to establish the qualifications for VA's health care professionals, determine the hours and conditions of employment, take disciplinary action against employees, and otherwise regulate the professional activities of those individuals. 38 U.S.C.

7401-7464. Specifically, section 7402(b) states that most health care professionals, after appointment by VA, must, among other Start Printed Page 71844requirements, be licensed, registered, or certified to practice their profession in a State. To that end, VA's regulations and policies will preempt any State law or action that conflicts with the exercise of Federal duties in providing health care at VA. In addition, any regulatory preemption of State law must be restricted to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the statute pursuant to the regulations that are promulgated.

In this rulemaking, State licensure, registration, and certification laws, rules, regulations, or other requirements are preempted only to the extent such State laws unduly interfere with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment. Therefore, VA believes that the rulemaking is restricted to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the Federal statutes. The Executive Order also requires an agency that is publishing a regulation that preempts State law to follow certain procedures. These procedures include.

The agency consult with, to the extent practicable, the appropriate State and local officials in an effort to avoid conflicts between State law and Federally protected interests. And the agency provide all affected State and local officials notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the proceedings. For the reasons below, VA believes that it is not practicable to consult with the appropriate State and local officials prior to the publication of this rulemaking. The National Emergency caused by erectile dysfunction treatment has highlighted VA's acute need to quickly shift health care professionals across the country.

As both private and VA medical facilities in different parts of the country reach or exceed capacity, VA must be able to mobilize its health care professionals across State lines to provide critical care for those in need. As explained in the Supplementary Information above, as of June 2020, a total of 1,893 staff have been mobilized to meet the needs of our facilities and Fourth Mission requests during the cialis. VA deployed 877 staff to meet Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mission requests, 420 health care professionals were deployed as DEMPS response, 414 employees were mobilized to cross level staffing needs within their Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), 69 employees were mobilized to support needs in another VISN, and 113 Travel Nurse Corps staff responded specifically for erectile dysfunction treatment staffing support. Given the speed in which it is required for our health care professionals to go to these facilities and provide health care, it is also essential that the health care professionals can follow the same standards of practice irrespective of the location of the facility or the requirements of their individual State license.

This is important because if multiple health care professionals, such as multiple registered nurses, licensed in different States are all sent to one VA medical facility to assist when there is a shortage of professionals, it would be difficult and cumbersome if they could not all perform the same duties and each supervising provider had to be briefed on the tasks each registered nurse could perform. In addition, not having a uniform national scope of practice could limit the tasks that the registered nurses could provide. This rulemaking will provide health care professionals an increased level of protection against adverse State actions while VA strives to increase access to high quality health care across the VA health care system during this National Emergency. It would be time consuming and contrary to the public health and safety to delay implementing this rulemaking until we consulted with State and local officials.

For these reasons, it would be impractical to consult with State and local officials prior to the publication of this rulemaking. We note that this rulemaking does not establish any national standards of practice. Instead, VA will establish the national standards of practice via subregulatory guidance. VA will, to the extent practicable, make all efforts to engage with State and local officials when establishing the national standards of practice via subregulatory guidance.

Also, this interim final rule will have a 60-day comment period that will allow State and local officials the opportunity to provide their input on the rule. Administrative Procedures Act An Agency may forgo notice and comment required under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, if the agency for good cause finds that compliance would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. An agency may also bypass the APA's 30-day publication requirement if good cause exists.

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs finds that there is good cause under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to publish this rule without prior opportunity for public comment because it would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest and finds that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to bypass its 30-day publication requirement for the same reasons as outlined above in the Federalism section, above. In short, this rulemaking will provide health care professionals protection against adverse State actions while VA strives to increase access to high quality health care across the VA health care system during this National Emergency.

In addition to the needs discussed above regarding the National Emergency, it is also imperative that VA move its health care professionals across State lines in order to facilitate the implementation of the new EHR system immediately. VA implemented EHR at the first VA facility in October 2020 and additional sites are scheduled to have EHR implemented over the course of the next eight years. The next site is scheduled for implementation in Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2021 (i.e., between January to March 2021). Due to the implementation of the new EHR system, VA expects decreased productivity and reduced clinical staffing during training and other events surrounding EHR enactment.

VA expects a productivity decrease of up to 30 percent for the 60 days before implementation and the 120 days after at each site. Any decrease in productivity could result in decreased access to health care for our Nation's veterans. In order to support this anticipated productivity decrease, VA is engaging in a “national supplement,” where health care professionals from other VA medical facilities will be deployed to those VA medical facilities and VISNs that are undergoing EHR implementation. The national supplement would mitigate reduced access during EHR deployment activities, such as staff training, cutover, and other EHR implementation activities.

Over the eight-year deployment timeline, the national supplement is estimated to have full time employee equivalents of approximately 60 nurses, 3 pharmacy technicians, 5 mental health and primary care providers, and other VA health care professionals. We note that the actual number of VA health care professionals deployed to each site will vary based on need. The national supplement will require VA health care professionals on a national level to practice health care in States where they do not hold a State license, registration, certification, or other requirement. In addition, VISNs will be providing local cross-leveling and intra-VISN staff deployments to support EHRM implementation activities.

Put simply, in order to mitigate the decreased Start Printed Page 71845productivity as a result of EHR implementation, VA must transfer VA health care professionals across the country to States where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or other requirement to assist in training on the new system as well as to support patient care. Therefore, it would be impracticable and contrary to the public health and safety to delay implementing this rulemaking until a full public notice-and-comment process is completed. This rulemaking will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register. As noted above, this interim final rule will have a 60-day comment period that will allow State and local officials the opportunity to provide their input on the rule, and VA will take those comments into consideration when deciding whether any modifications to this rule are warranted.

Paperwork Reduction Act This final rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, is not applicable to this rulemaking because a notice of proposed rulemaking is not required under 5 U.S.C.

553. 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 603(a), 604(a). Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, and other advantages.

Distributive impacts. And equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at http://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's website at http://www.va.gov/​orpm/​, by following the link for “VA Regulations Published From FY 2004 Through Fiscal Year to Date.” This interim final rule is not subject to the requirements of E.O. 13771 because this rule results in no more than de minimis costs. Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.

1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This interim final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Congressional Review Act Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule as not a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2). Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for the programs affected by this document are. 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation Centers. 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care.

64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits. 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care. 64.011, Veterans Dental Care. 64.012, Veterans Prescription Service.

64.013, Veterans Prosthetic Appliances. 64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical Resources. 64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence. 64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary Care.

64.039 CHAMPVA. 64.040 VHA Inpatient Medicine. 64.041 VHA Outpatient Specialty Care. 64.042 VHA Inpatient Surgery.

64.043 VHA Mental Health Residential. 64.044 VHA Home Care. 64.045 VHA Outpatient Ancillary Services. 64.046 VHA Inpatient Psychiatry.

64.047 VHA Primary Care. 64.048 VHA Mental Health Clinics. 64.049 VHA Community Living Center. And 64.050 VHA Diagnostic Care.

Start List of Subjects Administrative practice and procedureAlcohol abuseAlcoholismClaimsDay careDental healthDrug abuseForeign relationsGovernment contractsGrant programs-healthGrant programs-veteransHealth careHealth facilitiesHealth professionsHealth recordsHomelessMedical and dental schoolsMedical devicesMedical researchMental health programsNursing homesReporting and recordkeeping requirementsScholarships and fellowshipsTravel and transportation expensesVeterans End List of Subjects Signing Authority The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Brooks D. Tucker, Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Legislative Affairs, Performing the Delegable Duties of the Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on October 19, 2020, for publication. Start Signature Consuela Benjamin, Regulations Development Coordinator, Office of Regulation Policy &.

Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs. End Signature For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs is amending 38 CFR part 17 as set forth below. Start Part End Part Start Amendment Part1. The authority citation for part 17 is amended by adding an entry for § 17.419 in numerical order to read in part as follows.

End Amendment Part Start Authority 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections. End Authority * * * * * Section 17.419 also issued under 38 U.S.C. 1701 (note), 7301, 7306, 7330A, 7401-7403, 7405, 7406, 7408).

* * * * * Start Amendment Part2. Add § 17.419 to read as follows. End Amendment Part Health care professionals' practice in VA. (a) Definitions.

The following definitions apply to this section. (1) Beneficiary. The term beneficiary means a veteran or any other individual receiving health care under title 38 of the United States Code. (2) Health care professional.

The term health care professional is an individual who. (i) Is appointed to an occupation in the Veterans Health Administration that is listed in or authorized under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S. Code.

(ii) Is not a VA-contracted health care professional. And (iii) Is qualified to provide health care as follows. (A) Has an active, current, full, and unrestricted license, registration, certification, or satisfies another State requirement in a State. (B) Has other qualifications as prescribed by the Secretary for one of Start Printed Page 71846the health care professions listed under 38 U.S.C.

7402(b). (C) Is an employee otherwise authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services. Or (D) Is under the clinical supervision of a health care professional that meets the requirements of subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A)-(C) of this section and is either. (i) A health professions trainee appointed under 38 U.S.C.

7405 or 7406 participating in clinical or research training under supervision to satisfy program or degree requirements. Or (ii) A health care employee, appointed under title 5 of the U.S. Code, 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3), or 38 U.S.C.

7405 for any category of personnel described in 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3) who must obtain an active, current, full and unrestricted licensure, registration, certification, or meet the qualification standards as defined by the Secretary within the specified time frame. (3) State. The term State means a State as defined in 38 U.S.C.

101(20), or a political subdivision of such a State. (b) Health care professional's practice. (1) When a State law or license, registration, certification, or other requirement prevents or unduly interferes with a health care professional's practice within the scope of their VA employment, the health care professional is required to abide by their Federal duties, which includes, but is not limited to, the following situations. (i) A health care professional may practice their VA health care profession in any State irrespective of the State where they hold a valid license, registration, certification, or other State qualification.

Or (ii) A health care professional may practice their VA health care profession within the scope of the VA national standard of practice as determined by VA. (2) VA health care professional's practice is subject to the limitations imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300 et seq., on the authority to prescribe or administer controlled substances, as well as any other limitations on the provision of VA care set forth in applicable Federal law and policy.

(c) Preemption of State law. Pursuant to the Supremacy Clause, U.S. Const. Art.

IV, cl. 2, and in order to achieve important Federal interests, including, but not limited to, the ability to provide the same complete health care and hospital service to beneficiaries in all States as required by 38 U.S.C. 7301, conflicting State laws, rules, regulations or requirements pursuant to such laws are without any force or effect, and State governments have no legal authority to enforce them in relation to actions by health care professionals within the scope of their VA employment. End Supplemental Information [FR Doc.

2020-24817 Filed 11-10-20. 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8320-01-P.

Start Preamble cheap generic cialis Clicking Here Census Bureau, Commerce. Notice of information collection. Request for cheap generic cialis comment. The Department of Commerce, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 60 days of public cheap generic cialis comment on a proposed new information collection, the Management and Organizational Practices Survey—Hospitals (MOPS-HP).

An information collection request (ICR) for the MOPS-HP was submitted to OMB for approval on July 7, 2020 and is currently pending OMB review. To ensure consideration, comments regarding this proposed information collection must be received on or before January 19, 2021. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments by email to cheap generic cialis Thomas.J.Smith@census.gov. Please reference Management and Organizational Practices Survey—Hospitals (MOPS-HP) in the subject line of your comments. You may also submit comments, identified by Docket Number USBC-2020-0029, to the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal cheap generic cialis.

Http://www.regulations.gov. All comments received are part of the public record. No comments will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov for public viewing until cheap generic cialis after the comment period has closed. Comments will generally be posted without change. All Personally Identifiable Information cheap generic cialis (for example, name and address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible.

Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats. Start Further Info Requests for additional information or specific questions cheap generic cialis related to collection activities should be directed to Edward Watkins at edward.e.watkins.iii@census.gov or 301-763-4750. End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information I. Abstract The U.S cheap generic cialis.

Census Bureau plans to conduct the Management and Organizational Practices Survey-Hospitals (MOPS-HP) for survey year 2020 as a joint project with Harvard Business School. The MOPS-HP will cheap generic cialis utilize a subset of the Service Annual Survey mail-out sample and will collect data on management practices from Chief Nursing Officers (CNOs) at general medical and surgical hospitals to assist in studying their relationship to clinical and financial performance. A notice seeking public comment on our plans to conduct this survey was previously published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2020, on pages 4623-4624. That notice proposed collecting data for survey years 2019 and 2014, but collection has been adjusted due to the ongoing erectile dysfunction cialis. The cialis has further highlighted the relevance of cheap generic cialis hospital management practices, especially as they relate to hospitals' abilities to respond to shocks to their organization and the health care system.

In light of this, the Census Bureau has modified the survey proposal to collect data for reference years 2020 and 2019. This change seeks to directly measure management practices and protocols before and during cheap generic cialis the cialis to obtain a better understanding of how hospitals have had to adjust and pivot operations during this public health emergency. The Census Bureau also plans to include two additional questions in the MOPS-HP content to help improve measurement of hospital preparedness. These questions will provide information on two elements of responsiveness, hospitals' coordinated deployment of frontline clinical workers and hospitals' ability to quickly respond to needed changes in standardized clinical protocols. In an effort to cheap generic cialis limit respondent burden while adding this content, adjustments were made to keep the total number of questions and estimated burden per response unchanged.

The project plan, schedule, and collection strategy are being actively monitored, and adjustments will be made as necessary, as the Census Bureau is cognizant and respectful of the time, resources, and burden placed on CNOs during the cialis. After the close of this second comment period, the Census cheap generic cialis Bureau will submit these planned changes as an amendment to the ICR, which is currently pending review at OMB. Any comments received by the close of the comment period will be summarized and included in the amendment. Currently, no official statistics on management practices in hospitals exist. Past research shows these practices are related to health cheap generic cialis care providers' clinical and financial outcomes.

This suggests that providing measures on management practices may potentially help the United States health care system, which is challenged by rising health care costs, increased demand from an aging society, and quality objectives. These data would permit users to examine relationships between management practices and financial outcomes using Census cheap generic cialis Bureau data (e.g., revenues) and relationships with clinical outcomes using external data sources. Additionally, these data would provide hospital administrators and managers information to evaluate their practices in comparison to other hospitals at an aggregate level. The MOPS-HP content was proposed by external researchers with past cheap generic cialis experience in surveying hospitals on management practices. Some questions are adapted from the Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS), conducted in the manufacturing sector, allowing for inter-sectoral comparisons.

Content for the MOPS-HP includes performance monitoring, financial and clinical targets, and incentives. The 39 questions are grouped cheap generic cialis into the following sections. Tenure, Management Practices, Management Training, Management of Team Interactions, Staffing and Allocation of Human Resources, Standardized Clinical Protocols, Documentation of Patients' Medical Records, and Organizational Characteristics.Start Printed Page 73674 II. Method of Collection The MOPS-HP sample will consist of approximately 3,200 hospital locations for enterprises classified under General Medical and Surgical Hospitals (NAICS 6221) cheap generic cialis and sampled in the Service Annual Survey (SAS). The survey will be mailed separately from the 2020 SAS and collected electronically through the Census Bureau's Centurion online reporting system.

Respondents will be sent an initial letter with instructions detailing how to log into the instrument and report their information. These letters will be addressed to the location's CNO cheap generic cialis. In instances where the CNO is not identifiable, the letter will be addressed to the hospital's administrative office with attention to the CNO. Collection is scheduled to begin in the initial months cheap generic cialis of 2021. III.

Data OMB Control Number. 0607-XXXX. Form Number(s). MP-2000. Type of Review.

Regular submission, New Information Collection Request. Affected Public. General medical and surgical hospitals. Estimated Number of Respondents. Approximately 3,200.

Estimated Time per Response. 45 minutes. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours. 2,400. Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public.

$0. (This is not the cost of respondents' time, but the indirect costs respondents may incur for such things as purchases of specialized software or hardware needed to report, or expenditures for accounting or records maintenance services required specifically by the collection.) Respondent's Obligation. Mandatory. Legal Authority. Title 13 U.S.C., Sections 131 and 182.

IV. Request for Comments We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department/Bureau to. (a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility. (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.

And (d) Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include, or summarize, each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Start Signature Sheleen Dumas, Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Commerce Department. End Signature End Supplemental Information [FR Doc. 2020-25580 Filed 11-18-20. 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510-07-PStart Preamble Department of Veterans Affairs. Interim final rule.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is issuing this interim final rule to confirm that its health care professionals may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. Specifically, this rulemaking confirms VA's current practice of allowing VA health care professionals to deliver health care services in a State other than the health care professional's State of licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirement, thereby enhancing beneficiaries' access to critical VA health care services. This rulemaking also confirms VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professionals which will standardize a health care professional's practice in all VA medical facilities. Effective Date. This rule is effective on November 12, 2020.

Comments. Comments must be received on or before January 11, 2021. Comments may be submitted through www.Regulations.gov or mailed to, Beth Taylor, 10A1, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to [“RIN 2900-AQ94—Authority of VA Professionals to Practice Health Care.”] Comments received will be available at regulations.gov for public viewing, inspection, or copies. Start Further Info Beth Taylor, Chief Nursing Officer, Veterans Health Administration.

810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-7250. (This is not a toll-free number.) End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the erectile dysfunction treatment outbreak to be a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. On January 31, 2020, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services declared a Public Health Emergency pursuant to 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 247d, for the entire United States to aid in the nation's health care community response to the erectile dysfunction treatment outbreak. On March 11, 2020, in light of new data and the rapid spread in Europe, WHO declared erectile dysfunction treatment to be a cialis. On March 13, 2020, the President declared a National Emergency due to erectile dysfunction treatment under sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C.

1601 et seq.) and consistent with section 1135 of the Social Security Act (SSA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 1320b-5). As a result of responding to the needs of our veteran population and other non-veteran beneficiaries during the erectile dysfunction treatment National Emergency, where VA has had to shift health care Start Printed Page 71839professionals to other locations or duties to assist in the care of those affected by this cialis, VA has become acutely aware of the need to promulgate this rule to clarify the policies governing VA's provision of health care. This rule is intended to confirm that VA health care professionals may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. In particular, it will confirm (1) VA's continuing practice of authorizing VA health care professionals to deliver health care services in a State other than the health care professional's State of licensure, registration, certification, or other requirement.

And (2) VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professions via policy, which will govern their employment, subject only to State laws where the health care professional is licensed, credentialed, registered, or subject to some other State requirements that do not unduly interfere with those duties. We note that the term State as it applies to this rule means each of the several States, Territories, and possessions of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a political subdivision of such State. This definition is consistent with the term State as it is defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(20). A conflicting State law is one that would unduly interfere with the fulfillment of a VA health care professional's Federal duties.

We note that the policies and practices confirmed in this rule only apply to VA health care professionals appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S. Code, which does not include contractors working in VA medical facilities or those working in the community. VA has long understood its governing statutory authorities to permit VA to engage in these practices. Section 7301(b) of title 38 the U.S.

Code establishes that the primary function of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) within VA is to provide a complete medical and hospital service for the medical care and treatment of veterans. To allow VHA to carry out its medical care mission, Congress established a comprehensive personnel system for certain VA health care professionals, independent of the civil service rules. See Chapters 73-74 of title 38 of the U.S. Code. Congress granted the Secretary express statutory authority to establish the qualifications for VA's health care professionals, determine the hours and conditions of employment, take disciplinary action against employees, and otherwise regulate the professional activities of those individuals.

38 U.S.C. 7401-7464. Section 7402 of 38 U.S.C. Establishes the qualifications of appointees. To be eligible for appointment as a VA employee in a health care profession covered by section 7402(b) (other than a medical facility Director appointed under section 7402(b)(4)), most individuals, after appointment, must, among other requirements, be licensed, registered, or certified to practice their profession in a State, or satisfy some other State requirement.

However, the standards prescribed in section 7402(b) establish only the basic qualifications for VA health care professionals and do not limit the Secretary from establishing other qualifications or rules for health care professionals. In addition, the Secretary is responsible for the control, direction, and management of the Department, including agency personnel and management matters. See 38 U.S.C. 303. Such authorities permit the Secretary to further regulate the health care professions to make certain that VA's health care system provides safe and effective health care by qualified health care professionals to ensure the well-being of those veterans who have borne the battle.

In this rulemaking, VA is detailing its authority to manage its health care professionals by stating that they may practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other State requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. VA believes that this is necessary in order to provide additional protection for VA health care professionals against adverse State actions proposed or taken against them when they are practicing within the scope of their VA employment, particularly when they are practicing across State lines or when they are performing duties consistent with a VA national standard of practice for their health care profession. Practice Across State Lines Historically, VA has operated as a national health care system that authorizes VA health care professionals to practice in any State as long as they have a valid license, registration, certification, or fulfill other State requirements in at least one State. In doing so, VA health care professionals have been practicing within the scope of their VA employment regardless of any unduly burdensome State requirements that would restrict practice across State lines. We note, however, that VA may only hire health care professionals who are licensed, registered, certified, or satisfy some other requirement in a State, unless the statute requires or provides otherwise (e.g., 38 U.S.C.

7402(b)(14)). The erectile dysfunction treatment cialis has highlighted VA's acute need to exercise its statutory authority of allowing VA health care professionals to practice across State lines. In response to the cialis, VA needed to and continues to need to move health care professionals quickly across the country to care for veterans and other beneficiaries and not have State licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirements hinder such actions. Put simply, it is crucial for VA to be able to determine the location and practice of its VA health care professionals to carry out its mission without any unduly burdensome restrictions imposed by State licensure, registration, certification, or other requirements. This rulemaking will support VA's authority to do so and will provide an increased level of protection against any adverse State action being proposed or taken against VA health care professionals who practice within the scope of their VA employment.

Since the start of the cialis, in furtherance of VA's Fourth Mission, VA has rapidly utilized its resources to assist parts of the country that are undergoing serious and critical shortages of health care resources. VA's Fourth Mission is to improve the Nation's preparedness for response to war, terrorism, national emergencies, and natural disasters by developing plans and taking actions to ensure continued service to veterans, as well as to support national, State, and local emergency management, public health, safety and homeland security efforts. VA has deployed personnel to support other VA medical facilities that have been impacted by erectile dysfunction treatment as well as provided support to State and community nursing homes. As of July 2020, VA has deployed personnel to more than 45 States. VA utilized the Disaster Emergency Medical Personnel System (DEMPS), VA's main deployment program, for VA health care professionals to travel to locations deemed as national emergency or disaster areas, to help provide health care services in places such as New Orleans, Louisiana, and New York City, New York.

As of June 2020, a total of 1,893 staff have been mobilized to meet the needs of our facilities and Fourth Start Printed Page 71840Mission requests during the cialis. VA deployed 877 staff to meet Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mission requests, 420 health care professionals were deployed as DEMPS response, 414 employees were mobilized to cross level staffing needs within their Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), 69 employees were mobilized to support needs in another VISN, and 113 Travel Nurse Corps staff responded specifically for erectile dysfunction treatment staffing support. In light of the rapidly changing landscape of the cialis, it is crucial for VA to be able to move its health care professionals quickly across the country to assist when a new hot spot emerges without fear of any adverse action from a State be proposed or taken against a VA health care professional. We note that, in addition to providing in person health care across State lines during the cialis, VA also provides telehealth across State lines. VA's video to home services have been heavily leveraged during the cialis to deliver safe, quality VA health care while adhering to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) physical distancing guidelines.

Video visits to veterans' homes or other offsite location have increased from 41,425 in February 2020 to 657,423 in July of 2020. This represents a 1,478 percent utilization increase. VA has specific statutory authority under 38 U.S.C. 1730C to allow health care professionals to practice telehealth in any State regardless of where they are licensed, registered, certified, or satisfy some other State requirement. This rulemaking is consistent with Congressional intent under Public Law 115-185, sec.

151, June 6, 2018, codified at 38 U.S.C. 1730C for all VA health care professionals to practice across State lines regardless of the location of where they provide health care. This rulemaking will ensure that VA professionals are protected regardless of how they provide health care, whether it be via telehealth or in-person. Beyond the current need to mobilize health care resources quickly to different parts of the country, this practice of allowing VA health care professionals to practice across State lines optimizes the VA health care workforce to meet the needs of all VA beneficiaries year-round. It is common practice within the VA health care system to have primary and specialty health care professionals routinely travel to smaller VA medical facilities or rural locations in nearby States to provide care that may be difficult to obtain or unavailable in that community.

As of January 14, 2020, out of 182,100 licensed health care professionals who are employed by VA, 25,313 or 14 percent do not hold a State license, registration, or certification in the same State as their main VA medical facility. This number does not include the VA health care professionals who practice at a main VA medical facility in one State where they are licensed, registered, certified, or hold some other State requirement, but also practice at a nearby Community Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC) in a neighboring State where they do not hold such credentials. Indeed, 49 out of the 140 VA medical facilities nationwide have one or more sites of care in a different State than the main VA medical facility. Also, VA has rural mobile health units that provide health care services to veterans who have difficulty accessing VA health care facilities. These mobile units are a vital source of health care to veterans who live in rural and medically underserved communities.

Some of the services provided by the mobile units include, but are not limited to, health care screening, mental health outreach, influenza and pneumonia vaccinations, and routine primary care. The rural mobile health units are an integral part of VA's goal of encouraging healthier communities and support VA's preventative health programs. Health care professionals who provide health care in these mobile units may provide services in various States where they may not hold a license, registration, or certification, or satisfy some other State requirement. It is critical that these health care professionals are protected from any adverse State action proposed or taken when performing these crucial services. In addition, the practice of health care professionals of providing health care across State lines also gives VA the flexibility to hire qualified health care professionals from any State to meet the staffing needs of a VA health care facility where recruitment or retention is difficult.

As of December 31, 2019, VA had approximately 13,000 vacancies for health care professions across the country. As a national health care system, it is imperative for VA to be able to recruit and retain health care professionals, where recruitment and retention is difficult, to ensure there is access to health care regardless of where the VA beneficiary resides. Permitting VA health care professionals to practice across State lines is an important incentive when trying to recruit for these vacancies, particularly during a cialis, where private health care facilities have greater flexibility to offer more competitive pay and benefits. This is also especially beneficial in recruiting spouses of active service members who frequently move across the country. National Standard of Practice This rulemaking also confirms VA's authority to establish national standards of practice for health care professions.

We note that this rulemaking does not create any such national standards. All national standards of practice will be created via policy. For the purposes of this rulemaking, a national standard of practice describes the tasks and duties that a VA health care professional practicing in the health care profession may perform and may be permitted to undertake. Having a national standard of practice means that individuals from the same VA health care profession may provide the same type of tasks and duties regardless of the VA medical facility where they are located or the State license, registration, certification, or other State requirement they hold. We emphasize that VA will determine, on an individual basis, that a health care professional has the necessary education, training, and skills to perform the tasks and duties detailed in the national standard of practice.

The need for national standards of practice have been highlighted by VA's large-scale initiative regarding the new electronic health record (EHR). VA's health care system is currently undergoing a transformational initiative to modernize the system by replacing its current EHR with a joint EHR with Department of Defense (DoD) to promote interoperability of medical data between VA and DoD. VA's new EHR system will provide VA and DoD health care professionals with quick and efficient access to the complete picture of a veteran's health information, improving VA's delivery of health care to our nation's veterans. For this endeavor, DoD and VA established a joint governance over the EHR system. In order to be successful, VA must standardize clinical processes with DoD.

This means that all health care professionals in DoD and VA who practice in a certain health care profession must be able to carry out the same duties and tasks irrespective of State requirements. The reason why this is important is because each health care profession is designated a role in the EHR system that sets forth specific privileges within the EHR that dictate allowed tasks for such profession. These tasks include, but are not limited to, dispensing and administrating medications. Prescriptive practices. Ordering of procedures and diagnostic imaging.

And required level of oversight. VA has the ability to modify these privileges within EHR, however, VA Start Printed Page 71841cannot do so on an individual user level, but rather at the role level for each health care profession. In other words, VA cannot modify the privileges for all health care professionals in one State to be consistent with that State's requirements. Instead, the privileges can only be modified for every health care professional in that role across all States. Therefore, the privileges established within EHR cannot be made facility or State specific.

In order to achieve standardized clinical processes, VA and DoD must create the uniform standards of practice for each health care specialty. Currently, DoD has specific authority from Congress to create national standards of practice for their health care professionals under 10 U.S.C. 1094. While VA lacks a similarly specific statute, VA has the general statutory authority, as explained above, to regulate its health care professionals and authorize health care practices that preempt conflicting State law. This regulation will confirm VA's authority to do so.

Absent such standardized practices, it will be incredibly difficult for VA to achieve its goal of being an active participant in EHR modernization because either some VA health care professionals would fear potential adverse State actions or DoD and VA would need to agree upon roles that are consistent with the most restrictive States' requirements to ensure that all health care professionals are acting within the scope of their State requirements. VA believes that agreement upon roles that are consistent with the most restrictive State is not an acceptable option because it will lead to delayed care and consequently decreased access and level of health care for VA beneficiaries. One example that impacts multiple health care professions throughout the VA system is the ability to administer medication without a provider (physician or advanced practice nurse practitioner) co-signature. As it pertains to nursing, almost all States permit nurses to follow a protocol. However, some States, such as New York, North Carolina, and South Carolina, do not permit nurses to follow a protocol without a provider co-signature.

A protocol is a standing order that has been approved by medical and clinical leadership if a certain sequence of health care events occur. For instance, if a patient is exhibiting certain signs of a heart attack, there is a protocol in place to administer potentially life-saving medication. If the nurse is the first person to see the signs, the nurse will follow the approved protocol and immediately administer the medication. However, if the nurse cannot follow the protocol and requires a provider co-signature, administration of the medication will be delayed until a provider is able to co-sign the order, which may lead to the deterioration of the patient's condition. This also increases the provider's workload and decreases the amount of time the provider can spend with patients.

Historically, VA physical therapists (PTs), occupational therapists, and speech therapists were routinely able to determine the need to administer topical medications during therapy sessions and were able to administer the topical without a provider co-signature. However, in order to accommodate the new EHR system and variance in State requirements, these therapists would need to place an order for all medications, including topicals, which would leave these therapists waiting for a provider co-signature in the middle of a therapy session, thus delaying care. Furthermore, these therapists also routinely ordered imaging to better assess the clinical needs of the patient, but would also have to wait for a provider co-signature, which will further delay care and increase provider workload. In addition to requiring provider co-signatures, there will also be a significant decrease in access to care due to other variances in State requirements. For instance, direct access to PTs will be limited in order to ensure that the role is consistent with all State requirements.

Direct access means that a beneficiary may request PT services without a provider's referral. However, while almost half of the States allow unrestricted direct access to PTs, over half of the States have some limitations on requesting PT services. For instance, in Alabama, a licensed PT may perform an initial evaluation and may only provide other services as delineated in specific subdivisions of the Alabama Physical Therapy Practice Act. Furthermore, in New York, PT treatment may be rendered by a licensed PT for 10 visits or 30 days, whichever shall occur first, without a referral from a physician, dentist, podiatrist, nurse practitioner, or licensed midwife. This is problematic as VA will not be able to allow for direct access due to these variances and direct access has been shown to be beneficial for patient care.

Currently, VISN 23 is completing a two-year strategic initiative to implement direct access and have PTs embedded into patient aligned care teams (PACT). Outcomes thus far include decreased wait times, improved veteran satisfaction, improved provider satisfaction, and improved functional outcomes. Therefore, VA will confirm its authority to ensure that health care professionals are protected against State action when they adhere to VA's national standards of practice. We reiterate that this rulemaking does not establish national standards of practice for each health care profession, but merely confirms VA's authority to do so, thereby preempting any State restrictions that unduly interfere with those practices. The actual national standards of practice will be developed in subregulatory policy for each health care profession.

As such, VA will make a concerted effort to engage appropriate stakeholders when developing the national standards of practice. Preemption As previously explained, in this rulemaking, VA is confirming its authority to manage its health care professionals. Specifically, this rulemaking will confirm VA's long-standing practice of allowing its health care professionals to practice in a State where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or satisfy some other State requirement. The rule will also confirm that VA health care professionals must adhere to VA's national standards of practice, as determined by VA policy, irrespective of conflicting State licensing, registration, certification, or other State requirements that unduly burden that practice. We do note that VA health care professionals will only be required to perform tasks and duties to the extent of their education, skill, and training.

For instance, VA would not require a registered nurse to perform a task that the individual nurse was not trained to perform. Currently, practice in accordance with VA employment, including practice across State lines or adhering to a VA standard of practice, may jeopardize VA health care professionals' credentials or result in fines and imprisonment for unauthorized health care practice. This is because most States have restrictions that limit health care professionals' practice or have rules that prohibit health care professionals from furnishing health care services within that State without a license, registration, certification, or other requirement from that State. We note that, some States, for example Rhode Island, Utah, and Michigan, have enacted legislation or regulations that specifically allow certain VA health care professionals to practice in those States when they do not hold a State license. Several VA health care professionals have already had actions proposed or taken against them by various States Start Printed Page 71842while practicing health care within the scope of their VA employment, while they either practiced in a State where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or other State requirement that unduly interfered with their VA employment.

In one instance, a VA psychologist was licensed in California but was employed and providing supervision of a trainee at the VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Nashville, Tennessee. California psychology licensing laws require supervisors to hold a license from the State where they are practicing and do not allow for California licensed psychologists to provide supervision to trainees or unlicensed psychologists outside the State of California. The California State Psychology Licensing Board proposed sanctions and fines of $1,000 for violating section 1387.4(a) of the CA Code of Regulations (CCR). The VA system did not qualify for the exemption of out of State supervision requirements listed in CCR section 1387.4. In addition, a VA physician who was licensed in Oregon, but was practicing at a VAMC in Biloxi, Mississippi had the status of their license changed from active to inactive because the Oregon Medical Board determined the professional did not reside in Oregon, in violation of Oregon's requirement that a physician physically reside in the State in order to maintain an active license.

This rulemaking serves to preempt State requirements, such as the ones discussed above, that were or can be used to take an action against VA health care professionals for practicing within the scope of their VA employment. State licensure, registration, certification, and other State requirements are preempted to the extent such State laws unduly interfere with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment. As explained above, Congress provided general statutory provisions that permit the VA Secretary to authorize health care practices by health care professionals at VA, which serve to preempt conflicting State laws that unduly interfere with the exercise of health care by VA health care professionals pursuant to that authorization. Although some VA health care professionals are required by Federal statute to have a State license, see, e.g., 38 U.S.C. 7402(b)(1)(C) (providing that, to be eligible to be appointed to a physician position at the VA, a physician must be licensed to practice medicine, surgery, or osteopathy in a State), a State may not attach a condition to the license that is unduly burdensome to or unduly interferes with the practice of health care within the scope of VA employment.

Under well-established interpretations of the Supremacy Clause, Federal laws and policies authorizing VA health care professionals to practice according to VA standards preempt conflicting State law. That is, a State law that prevents or unreasonably interferes with the performance of VA duties. See, e.g., Hancock v. Train, 426 U.S. 167, 178-81 (1976).

Sperry v. Florida, 373 U.S. 379, 385 (1963). Miller v. Arkansas, 352 U.S.

187 (1956). Ohio v. Thomas, 173 U.S. 276, 282-84 (1899). State Bar Disciplinary Rules as Applied to Federal Government Attorneys, 9 Op.

O.L.C. 71, 72-73 (1985). When a State law does not conflict with the performance of Federal duties in these ways, VA health care professionals are required to abide by the State law. Therefore, VA's policies and regulations will preempt State licensure, registration, and certification laws, rules, or other requirements only to the extent they conflict with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment. We emphasize that, in instances where there is no conflict with State requirements, VA health care professionals should abide by the State requirement.

For example, if a State license requires a health care professional to have a certain number of hours of continuing professional education per year to maintain their license, the health care professional must adhere to this State requirement if it does not prevent or unduly interfere with the exercise of VA employment. To determine whether a State requirement is conflicting, VA would assess whether the State law unduly interferes on a case-by-case basis. For instance, if Oregon requires all licensed physicians to reside in Oregon, VA would likely find that it unduly interferes with already licensed VA physicians who reside and work for VA in the State of Mississippi. We emphasize that the intent of the regulation is to only preempt State requirements that are unduly burdensome and interfere with a VA health care professionals' practice for the VA. For instance, it would not require a State to issue a license to an individual who does not meet the education requirements to receive a license in that State.

We note that this rulemaking also does not affect VA's existing requirement that all VA health care professionals adhere to restrictions imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300, et seq., to prescribe or administer controlled substances. Any preemption of conflicting State requirements will be the minimum necessary for VA to effectively furnish health care services. It would be costly and time-consuming for VA to lobby each State board for each health care profession specialty to remove restrictions that impair VA's ability to furnish health care services to beneficiaries and then wait for the State to implement appropriate changes.

Doing so would not guarantee a successful result. Regulation For these reasons, VA is establishing a new regulation titled Health care professionals' practice in VA, which will be located at 38 CFR 17.419. This rule will confirm the ability of VA health care professionals to practice their health care profession consistent with the scope and requirements of their VA employment, notwithstanding any State license, registration, certification, or other requirements that unduly interfere with their practice. Subsection (a) of § 17.419 contains the definitions that will apply to the new section. Subsection (a)(1) contains the definition for beneficiary.

We are defining the term beneficiary to mean a veteran or any other individual receiving health care under title 38 of the U.S. Code. We are using this definition because VA provides health care to veterans, certain family members of veterans, servicemembers, and others. This is VA's standard use of this term. Subsection (a)(2) contains the definition for health care professional.

We are defining the term health care professional to be an individual who meets specific criteria that is listed below. Subsection (a)(2)(i) will require that a health care professional be appointed to an occupation in VHA that is listed or authorized under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S. Code. Subsection (a)(2)(ii) requires that the individual is not a VA-contracted health care professional.

A health care professional does not include a contractor or a community health care professional because they are not considered VA employees nor appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S. Code. Subsection (a)(2)(iii) lists the required qualifications for a health care professional. We note that these qualifications do not include all general Start Printed Page 71843qualifications for appointment, such as to hold a degree of doctor of medicine.

These qualifications are related to licensure, registration, certification, or other State requirements. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A) states that the health care professional must have an active, current, full, and unrestricted license, registration, certification, or satisfies another State requirement in a State to practice the health care specialty identified under 38 U.S.C. 7402(b). This standard ensures that VA health care professionals are qualified to practice their individual health care specialty if the specialty requires such credential. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(B) states that the individual has other qualifications as prescribed by the Secretary for one of the health care professions listed under 38 U.S.C.

7402(b). Some health care professionals appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7401(3) whose qualifications are listed in 38 U.S.C. 7402(b) are not required to meet State license, registration, certification, or other requirements and rely on the qualifications prescribed by the Secretary. Therefore, these individuals would be included in this subsection and required to have the qualifications prescribed by the Secretary for their health care profession.

Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(C) states that the individual is otherwise authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services. This would include those individuals who practice a health care profession that does not require a State license, registration, certification, or other requirement and is also not listed in 38 U.S.C. 7402(b), but is authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D) includes individuals who are trainees or may have a time limited appointment to finish clinicals or other requirements prior to being fully licensed. Therefore, the regulation will state that the individual is under the clinical supervision of a health care professional that meets the requirements listed in subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A)-(C) and the individual must meet the requirements in subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(i) or (a)(2)(iii)(D)(ii).

Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(i) states that the individual is a health professions trainee appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7405 or 7406 participating in clinical or research training under supervision to satisfy program or degree requirements. Subsection (a)(2)(iii)(D)(ii) states that the individual is a health care employee, appointed under title 5 of the U.S. Code, 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3), or 38 U.S.C.

7405 for any category of personnel described in 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3) who must obtain an active, current, full and unrestricted licensure, registration, or certification or meet the qualification standards as defined by the Secretary within the specified time frame. These individuals have a time-limited appointment to obtain credentials. For example, marriage and family therapists require a certain number of supervised clinical post-graduate hours prior to receiving their license. Lastly, as we previously discussed in this rulemaking, we are defining the term State in subsection (a)(3) as the term is defined in 38 U.S.C.

101(20), and also including political subdivisions of such States. This is consistent with the definition of State in 38 U.S.C. 1730C(f) which is VA's statutory authority to preempt State law when the covered health care professional is using telehealth to provide treatment to an individual under this title. We believe that it is important to define the term in the same way as it is defined for health care professionals practicing via telehealth so that way it is consistent regardless of whether the health care professional is practicing in-person or via telehealth. Moreover, as subdivisions of a State are granted legal authority from the State itself, it makes sense to subject entities created by a State, or authorized by a State to create themselves, to be subject to the same limitations and restrictions as the State itself.

Section 17.419(b) details that VA health care professionals must practice within the scope of their Federal employment irrespective of conflicting State requirements that would prevent or unduly interfere with the exercise of Federal duties. This provision confirms that VA health care professionals may furnish health care consistent with their VA employment obligations without fear of adverse action proposed or taken by any State. In order to clarify and make transparent how VA utilizes or intends to utilize our current statutory authority, we are providing a non-exhaustive list of examples. The first example is listed in subsection (b)(1)(i). It states that a health care professional may practice their VA health care profession in any State irrespective of the State where they hold a valid license, registration, certification, or other qualification.

The second example is listed in subsection (b)(1)(ii). It states that a health care professional may practice their VA health care profession consistent with the VA national standard of practice as determined by VA. As previously explained, VA intends to establish national standards of practice via VA policy. A health care professional's practice within VA will continue to be subject to the limitations imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801, et seq.

And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300, et seq., on the authority to prescribe or administer controlled substances, as well as any other limitations on the provision of VA care set forth in applicable Federal law and policy. This will ensure that professionals are still in compliance with critical laws concerning the prescribing and administering of controlled substances. This requirement is stated in subsection (b)(2). Subsection (c) expressly states the intended preemptive effect of § 17.419, to ensure that conflicting State and local laws, rules, regulations, and requirements related to health care professionals' practice will have no force or effect when such professionals are practicing health care while working within the scope of their VA employment. In circumstances where there is a conflict between Federal and State law, Federal law would prevail in accordance with Article VI, clause 2, of the U.S.

Constitution. Executive Order 13132 establishes principles for preemption of State law when it is implicated in rulemaking or proposed legislation. Where a Federal statute does not expressly preempt State law, agencies shall construe any authorization in the statute for the issuance of regulations as authorizing preemption of State law by rulemaking only when the exercise of State authority directly conflicts with the exercise of Federal authority or there is clear evidence to conclude that the Congress intended the agency to have the authority to preempt State law. In this situation, the Federal statutes do not expressly preempt State laws. However, VA construes the authorization established in 38 U.S.C.

303, 501, and 7401-7464 as authorizing preemption because the exercise of State authority directly conflicts with the exercise of Federal authority under these statutes. Congress granted the Secretary express statutory authority to establish the qualifications for VA's health care professionals, determine the hours and conditions of employment, take disciplinary action against employees, and otherwise regulate the professional activities of those individuals. 38 U.S.C. 7401-7464. Specifically, section 7402(b) states that most health care professionals, after appointment by VA, must, among other Start Printed Page 71844requirements, be licensed, registered, or certified to practice their profession in a State.

To that end, VA's regulations and policies will preempt any State law or action that conflicts with the exercise of Federal duties in providing health care at VA. In addition, any regulatory preemption of State law must be restricted to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the statute pursuant to the regulations that are promulgated. In this rulemaking, State licensure, registration, and certification laws, rules, regulations, or other requirements are preempted only to the extent such State laws unduly interfere with the ability of VA health care professionals to practice health care while acting within the scope of their VA employment. Therefore, VA believes that the rulemaking is restricted to the minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the Federal statutes. The Executive Order also requires an agency that is publishing a regulation that preempts State law to follow certain procedures.

These procedures include. The agency consult with, to the extent practicable, the appropriate State and local officials in an effort to avoid conflicts between State law and Federally protected interests. And the agency provide all affected State and local officials notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the proceedings. For the reasons below, VA believes that it is not practicable to consult with the appropriate State and local officials prior to the publication of this rulemaking. The National Emergency caused by erectile dysfunction treatment has highlighted VA's acute need to quickly shift health care professionals across the country.

As both private and VA medical facilities in different parts of the country reach or exceed capacity, VA must be able to mobilize its health care professionals across State lines to provide critical care for those in need. As explained in the Supplementary Information above, as of June 2020, a total of 1,893 staff have been mobilized to meet the needs of our facilities and Fourth Mission requests during the cialis. VA deployed 877 staff to meet Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Mission requests, 420 health care professionals were deployed as DEMPS response, 414 employees were mobilized to cross level staffing needs within their Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN), 69 employees were mobilized to support needs in another VISN, and 113 Travel Nurse Corps staff responded specifically for erectile dysfunction treatment staffing support. Given the speed in which it is required for our health care professionals to go to these facilities and provide health care, it is also essential that the health care professionals can follow the same standards of practice irrespective of the location of the facility or the requirements of their individual State license. This is important because if multiple health care professionals, such as multiple registered nurses, licensed in different States are all sent to one VA medical facility to assist when there is a shortage of professionals, it would be difficult and cumbersome if they could not all perform the same duties and each supervising provider had to be briefed on the tasks each registered nurse could perform.

In addition, not having a uniform national scope of practice could limit the tasks that the registered nurses could provide. This rulemaking will provide health care professionals an increased level of protection against adverse State actions while VA strives to increase access to high quality health care across the VA health care system during this National Emergency. It would be time consuming and contrary to the public health and safety to delay implementing this rulemaking until we consulted with State and local officials. For these reasons, it would be impractical to consult with State and local officials prior to the publication of this rulemaking. We note that this rulemaking does not establish any national standards of practice.

Instead, VA will establish the national standards of practice via subregulatory guidance. VA will, to the extent practicable, make all efforts to engage with State and local officials when establishing the national standards of practice via subregulatory guidance. Also, this interim final rule will have a 60-day comment period that will allow State and local officials the opportunity to provide their input on the rule. Administrative Procedures Act An Agency may forgo notice and comment required under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553, if the agency for good cause finds that compliance would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.

An agency may also bypass the APA's 30-day publication requirement if good cause exists. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs finds that there is good cause under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to publish this rule without prior opportunity for public comment because it would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest and finds that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to bypass its 30-day publication requirement for the same reasons as outlined above in the Federalism section, above. In short, this rulemaking will provide health care professionals protection against adverse State actions while VA strives to increase access to high quality health care across the VA health care system during this National Emergency.

In addition to the needs discussed above regarding the National Emergency, it is also imperative that VA move its health care professionals across State lines in order to facilitate the implementation of the new EHR system immediately. VA implemented EHR at the first VA facility in October 2020 and additional sites are scheduled to have EHR implemented over the course of the next eight years. The next site is scheduled for implementation in Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2021 (i.e., between January to March 2021). Due to the implementation of the new EHR system, VA expects decreased productivity and reduced clinical staffing during training and other events surrounding EHR enactment. VA expects a productivity decrease of up to 30 percent for the 60 days before implementation and the 120 days after at each site.

Any decrease in productivity could result in decreased access to health care for our Nation's veterans. In order to support this anticipated productivity decrease, VA is engaging in a “national supplement,” where health care professionals from other VA medical facilities will be deployed to those VA medical facilities and VISNs that are undergoing EHR implementation. The national supplement would mitigate reduced access during EHR deployment activities, such as staff training, cutover, and other EHR implementation activities. Over the eight-year deployment timeline, the national supplement is estimated to have full time employee equivalents of approximately 60 nurses, 3 pharmacy technicians, 5 mental health and primary care providers, and other VA health care professionals. We note that the actual number of VA health care professionals deployed to each site will vary based on need.

The national supplement will require VA health care professionals on a national level to practice health care in States where they do not hold a State license, registration, certification, or other requirement. In addition, VISNs will be providing local cross-leveling and intra-VISN staff deployments to support EHRM implementation activities. Put simply, in order to mitigate the decreased Start Printed Page 71845productivity as a result of EHR implementation, VA must transfer VA health care professionals across the country to States where they do not hold a license, registration, certification, or other requirement to assist in training on the new system as well as to support patient care. Therefore, it would be impracticable and contrary to the public health and safety to delay implementing this rulemaking until a full public notice-and-comment process is completed. This rulemaking will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

As noted above, this interim final rule will have a 60-day comment period that will allow State and local officials the opportunity to provide their input on the rule, and VA will take those comments into consideration when deciding whether any modifications to this rule are warranted. Paperwork Reduction Act This final rule contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, is not applicable to this rulemaking because a notice of proposed rulemaking is not required under 5 U.S.C.

553. 5 U.S.C. 601(2), 603(a), 604(a). Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, and other advantages. Distributive impacts.

And equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. VA's impact analysis can be found as a supporting document at http://www.regulations.gov, usually within 48 hours after the rulemaking document is published. Additionally, a copy of the rulemaking and its impact analysis are available on VA's website at http://www.va.gov/​orpm/​, by following the link for “VA Regulations Published From FY 2004 Through Fiscal Year to Date.” This interim final rule is not subject to the requirements of E.O.

13771 because this rule results in no more than de minimis costs. Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This interim final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Congressional Review Act Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C.

801 et seq.), the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule as not a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for the programs affected by this document are. 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation Centers. 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care.

64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits. 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care. 64.011, Veterans Dental Care. 64.012, Veterans Prescription Service. 64.013, Veterans Prosthetic Appliances.

64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical Resources. 64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence. 64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary Care. 64.039 CHAMPVA. 64.040 VHA Inpatient Medicine.

64.041 VHA Outpatient Specialty Care. 64.042 VHA Inpatient Surgery. 64.043 VHA Mental Health Residential. 64.044 VHA Home Care. 64.045 VHA Outpatient Ancillary Services.

64.046 VHA Inpatient Psychiatry. 64.047 VHA Primary Care. 64.048 VHA Mental Health Clinics. 64.049 VHA Community Living Center. And 64.050 VHA Diagnostic Care.

Start List of Subjects Administrative practice and procedureAlcohol abuseAlcoholismClaimsDay careDental healthDrug abuseForeign relationsGovernment contractsGrant programs-healthGrant programs-veteransHealth careHealth facilitiesHealth professionsHealth recordsHomelessMedical and dental schoolsMedical devicesMedical researchMental health programsNursing homesReporting and recordkeeping requirementsScholarships and fellowshipsTravel and transportation expensesVeterans End List of Subjects Signing Authority The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Brooks D. Tucker, Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Legislative Affairs, Performing the Delegable Duties of the Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on October 19, 2020, for publication. Start Signature Consuela Benjamin, Regulations Development Coordinator, Office of Regulation Policy &. Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.

End Signature For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs is amending 38 CFR part 17 as set forth below. Start Part End Part Start Amendment Part1. The authority citation for part 17 is amended by adding an entry for § 17.419 in numerical order to read in part as follows. End Amendment Part Start Authority 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.

End Authority * * * * * Section 17.419 also issued under 38 U.S.C. 1701 (note), 7301, 7306, 7330A, 7401-7403, 7405, 7406, 7408). * * * * * Start Amendment Part2. Add § 17.419 to read as follows. End Amendment Part Health care professionals' practice in VA.

(a) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section. (1) Beneficiary. The term beneficiary means a veteran or any other individual receiving health care under title 38 of the United States Code. (2) Health care professional.

The term health care professional is an individual who. (i) Is appointed to an occupation in the Veterans Health Administration that is listed in or authorized under 38 U.S.C. 7306, 7401, 7405, 7406, or 7408 or title 5 of the U.S. Code. (ii) Is not a VA-contracted health care professional.

And (iii) Is qualified to provide health care as follows. (A) Has an active, current, full, and unrestricted license, registration, certification, or satisfies another State requirement in a State. (B) Has other qualifications as prescribed by the Secretary for one of Start Printed Page 71846the health care professions listed under 38 U.S.C. 7402(b). (C) Is an employee otherwise authorized by the Secretary to provide health care services.

Or (D) Is under the clinical supervision of a health care professional that meets the requirements of subsection (a)(2)(iii)(A)-(C) of this section and is either. (i) A health professions trainee appointed under 38 U.S.C. 7405 or 7406 participating in clinical or research training under supervision to satisfy program or degree requirements. Or (ii) A health care employee, appointed under title 5 of the U.S. Code, 38 U.S.C.

7401(1) or (3), or 38 U.S.C. 7405 for any category of personnel described in 38 U.S.C. 7401(1) or (3) who must obtain an active, current, full and unrestricted licensure, registration, certification, or meet the qualification standards as defined by the Secretary within the specified time frame. (3) State. The term State means a State as defined in 38 U.S.C.

101(20), or a political subdivision of such a State. (b) Health care professional's practice. (1) When a State law or license, registration, certification, or other requirement prevents or unduly interferes with a health care professional's practice within the scope of their VA employment, the health care professional is required to abide by their Federal duties, which includes, but is not limited to, the following situations. (i) A health care professional may practice their VA health care profession in any State irrespective of the State where they hold a valid license, registration, certification, or other State qualification. Or (ii) A health care professional may practice their VA health care profession within the scope of the VA national standard of practice as determined by VA.

(2) VA health care professional's practice is subject to the limitations imposed by the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. 801 et seq. And implementing regulations at 21 CFR 1300 et seq., on the authority to prescribe or administer controlled substances, as well as any other limitations on the provision of VA care set forth in applicable Federal law and policy. (c) Preemption of State law. Pursuant to the Supremacy Clause, U.S.

Const. Art. IV, cl. 2, and in order to achieve important Federal interests, including, but not limited to, the ability to provide the same complete health care and hospital service to beneficiaries in all States as required by 38 U.S.C. 7301, conflicting State laws, rules, regulations or requirements pursuant to such laws are without any force or effect, and State governments have no legal authority to enforce them in relation to actions by health care professionals within the scope of their VA employment.

End Supplemental Information [FR Doc. 2020-24817 Filed 11-10-20. 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8320-01-P.

What side effects may I notice from Cialis?

Side effects that you should report to your doctor or health care professional as soon as possible:

• allergic reactions like skin rash, itching or hives, swelling of the face, lips, or tongue
• breathing problems
• changes in hearing
• chest pain
• fast, irregular heartbeat

Side effects that usually do not require medical attention (report to your doctor or health care professional if they continue or are bothersome):

• back pain
• dizziness
• flushing
• headache
• indigestion
• muscle aches
• stuffy or runny nose

This list may not describe all possible side effects.

Cialis for sale online

DOTHAN, AL – A shoe store in Dothan required 16- and 17-year-old how to get a cialis prescription from your doctor employees to drive at night as part of their job responsibilities and place cialis for sale online trash in an active compactor, in violation of federal child labor restrictions. These violations led to $37,280 in civil money penalties.The U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division investigation found that Journeys violated the Fair Labor cialis for sale online Standards Act’s regulations that prevent workers under 18 from operating vehicles at night. The division also cited the employer for violating federal labor laws when it allowed minors to load active trash compactors. “Child labor laws exist to allow minors to benefit from valuable work experience, but never at the expense of their safety, health, well-being and education,” said Wage and Hour Division District Director Kenneth Stripling cialis for sale online in Birmingham, Alabama.

€œThe sizeable penalties paid in this case should remind those who employ minors to review their employment practices before injuries occur, or worse.” Based in Nashville, Tennessee, Genesco Inc. Sells footwear and accessories in more than 1,450 retail stores under the Journeys, Schuh, Little Burgundy and cialis for sale online Johnston &. Murphy banners in the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. The company has approximately 16,000 cialis for sale online employees in North America. For more information about the FLSA and other laws enforced by the division, contact the agency’s toll-free helpline at 866-4US-WAGE (487-9243).

Learn more about the Wage and Hour Division, including a search tool to use if you think you may be owed back wages collected by the division..

DOTHAN, AL – A shoe store in Dothan required 16- and 17-year-old employees to drive at night as part of their job responsibilities and place trash in an active compactor, in violation of federal cheap generic cialis child labor restrictions. These violations led to $37,280 in civil money penalties.The U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division investigation found that Journeys violated cheap generic cialis the Fair Labor Standards Act’s regulations that prevent workers under 18 from operating vehicles at night.

The division also cited the employer for violating federal labor laws when it allowed minors to load active trash compactors. “Child labor laws exist to allow cheap generic cialis minors to benefit from valuable work experience, but never at the expense of their safety, health, well-being and education,” said Wage and Hour Division District Director Kenneth Stripling in Birmingham, Alabama. €œThe sizeable penalties paid in this case should remind those who employ minors to review their employment practices before injuries occur, or worse.” Based in Nashville, Tennessee, Genesco Inc.

Sells footwear and accessories in more than 1,450 retail stores under the Journeys, Schuh, Little Burgundy cheap generic cialis and Johnston &. Murphy banners in the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. The company has approximately 16,000 employees in North cheap generic cialis America.

For more information about the FLSA and other laws enforced by the division, contact the agency’s toll-free helpline at 866-4US-WAGE (487-9243). Learn more about the Wage and Hour Division, including a search tool to use if you think you may be owed back wages collected by the division..

Cheap cialis uk suppliers

Just like Medicaid, Medicare Savings Program recipients are deemed into LIS and don't need to cheap cialis uk suppliers apply https://wine-showroom.com/how-much-does-renova-cream-cost/ through SSA. For more information see this article. 3) by applying for Extra Help through the Social Security Administration.

The Extra Help income limits are 150% FPL and cheap cialis uk suppliers there is an asset test. SSA lists the income and resource limits for Extra Help on their website, where you can also file an application online and get more information about the program. You can also find out information about Extra Help in many different languages.

See Medicare Rights Center chart on Extra Help Income and Asset Limits - cheap cialis uk suppliers updated annually You can apply for Extra Help and MSP at the same time through SSA. SSA will forward your Extra Help application data to the New York State Department of Health, who will use that data to assess your eligibility for MSP. Individuals who apply for LIS through SSA and those who are deemed into LIS should receive written confirmation of their Extra Help status through SSA.

Of course, cheap cialis uk suppliers individuals who apply for LIS through SSA and are found ineligible are also entitled to a written notice and have appeal rights. Benefits of Extra Help 1) Assistance with Part D cost-sharing The Extra Help program provides a subsidy which covers most (but not all) of beneficiary’s cost sharing obligations. Extra Help beneficiaries do not have to worry about hitting the “donut hole” – the LIS subsidy continues to cover them through the donut hole and into catastrophic coverage.

Full Extra cheap cialis uk suppliers Help. LIS beneficiaries with incomes up to 135% FPL are generally eligible for "full" Extra Help -- meaning they pay no Part D deductible, no charge for monthly premiums up to the benchmark amount, and fixed, relatively low co-pays (between $1.30 and $8.95 for 2020 depending on the person's income level and the tier category of the drug. Medicaid beneficiaries in nursing homes, waiver programs, or managed long term care have $0 co-pays).

Full Extra Help beneficiaries who cheap cialis uk suppliers hit the catastrophic coverage limit have $0 co-pays. See current co-pay levels here. Partial Extra Help.

Beneficiaries between 135%-150% FPL receive "partial" Extra Help, which limits the Part cheap cialis uk suppliers D deductible to $89 (2020 figure - click here for updated chart). Sets sliding scale fees for monthly premiums. And limits co-pays to 15%, until the beneficiary reaches the catastrophic coverage limit, at which point co-pays are limited to a $8.95 maximum (2020 or see current amount here) or 5% of the drug cost, whichever is greater.

2) Facilitated enrollment into a Part D plan Extra Help recipients who aren’t already enrolled in cheap cialis uk suppliers a Part D plan and don’t want to choose one on their own will be automatically enrolled into a benchmark plan by CMS. This facilitated enrollment ensures that Extra Help recipients have Part D coverage. However, the downside to facilitated enrollment is that the plan may not be the best “fit” for the beneficiary, if it doesn’t cover all his/her drugs, assesses a higher tier level for covered drugs than other comparable plans, and/or requires the beneficiary to go through administrative hoops like prior authorization, quantity limits and/or step therapy.

Fortunately, Extra Help cheap cialis uk suppliers recipients can always enroll in a new plan … see #3 below. 3) Continuous special enrollment period Extra Help recipients have a continuous special enrollment period, meaning that they can switch plans at any time. They are not “locked into” the annual open enrollment period (October 15-December 7).

NOTE cheap cialis uk suppliers. This changed in 2019. Starting in 2019, those with Extra Help will no longer have a continuous enrollment period.

Instead, Extra cheap cialis uk suppliers Help recipients will be eligible to enroll no more than once per quarter for each of the first three quarters of the year. 4) No late enrollment penalty Non LIS beneficiaries generally face a premium penalty (higher monthly premium) if they delayed their enrollment into Part D, meaning that they didn’t enroll when they were initially eligible and didn’t have “creditable coverage.” Extra Help recipients do not have to worry about this problem – the late enrollment penalty provision does not apply to LIS beneficiaries. 1) For “deemed” beneficiaries (Medicaid/Medicare Savings Program recipients).

Extra Help status lasts at least until the end of the current calendar year, even if the individual loses their Medicaid or Medicare cheap cialis uk suppliers Savings Program coverage during that year. Individuals who receive Medicaid or a Medicare Savings Program any month between July and December keep their LIS status for the remainder of that calendar year and the following year. Getting Medicaid coverage for even just a short period of time (ie, meeting a spenddown for just one month) can help ensure that the individual obtains Extra Help coverage for at least 6 months, and possibly as long as 18 months.

TIP cheap cialis uk suppliers. People with a high spend-down who want to receive Medicaid for just one month in order to get Extra Help for 6-18 months can use past medical bills to meet their spend-down for that one month. There are different rules for using past paid medical bills verses past unpaid medical bills.

For information see Spend down training materials cheap cialis uk suppliers. Individuals who are losing their deemed status at the end of a calendar year because they are no longer receiving Medicaid or the Medicare Savings Program should be notified in advance by SSA, and given an opportunity to file an Extra Help application through SSA. 2) For “non-deemed” beneficiaries (those who filed their LIS applications through SSA) Non-deemed beneficiaries retain their LIS status until/unless SSA does a redetermination and finds the individual ineligible for Extra Help.

There are no reporting cheap cialis uk suppliers requirements per se in the Extra Help program, but beneficiaries must respond to SSA’s redetermination request. What to do if the Part D plan doesn't know that someone has Extra Help Sometimes there are lengthy delays between the date that someone is approved for Medicaid or a Medicare Savings Program and when that information is formally conveyed to the Part D plan by CMS. As a practical matter, this often results in beneficiaries being charged co-pays, premiums and/or deductibles that they can't afford and shouldn't have to pay.

To protect LIS beneficiaries, CMS has a "Best Available Evidence" policy which requires plans to accept alternative forms of proof of someone's LIS status and adjust the cheap cialis uk suppliers person's cost-sharing obligation accordingly. LIS beneficiaries who are being charged improperly should be sure to contact their plan and provide proof of their LIS status. If the plan still won't recognize their LIS status, the person or their advocate should file a complaint with the CMS regional office.

The federal regulations governing the Low Income Subsidy program can be found at 42 CFR Subpart P (sections 423.771 through cheap cialis uk suppliers 423.800). Also, CMS provides detailed guidance on the LIS provisions in chapter 13 of its Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Manual. This article was authored by the Empire Justice Center.Medicare Savings Programs (MSPs) pay for the monthly Medicare Part B premium for low-income Medicare beneficiaries and qualify enrollees for the "Extra Help" subsidy for Part D prescription drugs.

There are three separate MSP programs, the Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB) Program, the Specified Low cheap cialis uk suppliers Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLMB) Program and the Qualified Individual (QI) Program, each of which is discussed below. Those in QMB receive additional subsidies for Medicare costs. See 2019 Fact Sheet on MSP in NYS by Medicare Rights Center ENGLISH SPANISH State law.

N.Y cheap cialis uk suppliers. Soc. Serv.

L. § 367-a(3)(a), (b), and (d). 2020 Medicare 101 Basics for New York State - 1.5 hour webinar by Eric Hausman, sponsored by NYS Office of the Aging TOPICS COVERED IN THIS ARTICLE 1.

No Asset Limit 1A. Summary Chart of MSP Programs 2. Income Limits &.

Rules and Household Size 3. The Three MSP Programs - What are they and how are they Different?. 4.

FOUR Special Benefits of MSP Programs. Back Door to Extra Help with Part D MSPs Automatically Waive Late Enrollment Penalties for Part B - and allow enrollment in Part B year-round outside of the short Annual Enrollment Period No Medicaid Lien on Estate to Recover Payment of Expenses Paid by MSP Food Stamps/SNAP not reduced by Decreased Medical Expenses when Enroll in MSP - at least temporarily 5. Enrolling in an MSP - Automatic Enrollment &.

Applications for People who Have Medicare What is Application Process?. 6. Enrolling in an MSP for People age 65+ who Do Not Qualify for Free Medicare Part A - the "Part A Buy-In Program" 7.

What Happens After MSP Approved - How Part B Premium is Paid 8 Special Rules for QMBs - How Medicare Cost-Sharing Works 1. NO ASSET LIMIT!. Since April 1, 2008, none of the three MSP programs have resource limits in New York -- which means many Medicare beneficiaries who might not qualify for Medicaid because of excess resources can qualify for an MSP.

1.A. SUMMARY CHART OF MSP BENEFITS QMB SLIMB QI-1 Eligibility ASSET LIMIT NO LIMIT IN NEW YORK STATE INCOME LIMIT (2020) Single Couple Single Couple Single Couple $1,064 $1,437 $1,276 $1,724 $1,436 $1,940 Federal Poverty Level 100% FPL 100 – 120% FPL 120 – 135% FPL Benefits Pays Monthly Part B premium?. YES, and also Part A premium if did not have enough work quarters and meets citizenship requirement.

See “Part A Buy-In” YES YES Pays Part A &. B deductibles &. Co-insurance YES - with limitations NO NO Retroactive to Filing of Application?.

Yes - Benefits begin the month after the month of the MSP application. 18 NYCRR §360-7.8(b)(5) Yes – Retroactive to 3rd month before month of application, if eligible in prior months Yes – may be retroactive to 3rd month before month of applica-tion, but only within the current calendar year. (No retro for January application).

See GIS 07 MA 027. Can Enroll in MSP and Medicaid at Same Time?. YES YES NO!.

Must choose between QI-1 and Medicaid. Cannot have both, not even Medicaid with a spend-down. 2.

INCOME LIMITS and RULES Each of the three MSP programs has different income eligibility requirements and provides different benefits. The income limits are tied to the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). 2019 FPL levels were released by NYS DOH in GIS 20 MA/02 - 2020 Federal Poverty Levels -- Attachment II and have been posted by Medicaid.gov and the National Council on Aging and are in the chart below.

NOTE. There is usually a lag in time of several weeks, or even months, from January 1st of each year until the new FPLs are release, and then before the new MSP income limits are officially implemented. During this lag period, local Medicaid offices should continue to use the previous year's FPLs AND count the person's Social Security benefit amount from the previous year - do NOT factor in the Social Security COLA (cost of living adjustment).

Once the updated guidelines are released, districts will use the new FPLs and go ahead and factor in any COLA. See 2019 Fact Sheet on MSP in NYS by Medicare Rights Center ENGLISH SPANISH Income is determined by the same methodology as is used for determining in eligibility for SSI The rules for counting income for SSI-related (Aged 65+, Blind, or Disabled) Medicaid recipients, borrowed from the SSI program, apply to the MSP program, except for the new rules about counting household size for married couples. N.Y.

367-a(3)(c)(2), NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7, 89-ADM-7 p.7. Gross income is counted, although there are certain types of income that are disregarded. The most common income disregards, also known as deductions, include.

(a) The first $20 of your &. Your spouse's monthly income, earned or unearned ($20 per couple max). (b) SSI EARNED INCOME DISREGARDS.

* The first $65 of monthly wages of you and your spouse, * One-half of the remaining monthly wages (after the $65 is deducted). * Other work incentives including PASS plans, impairment related work expenses (IRWEs), blind work expenses, etc. For information on these deductions, see The Medicaid Buy-In for Working People with Disabilities (MBI-WPD) and other guides in this article -- though written for the MBI-WPD, the work incentives apply to all Medicaid programs, including MSP, for people age 65+, disabled or blind.

(c) monthly cost of any health insurance premiums but NOT the Part B premium, since Medicaid will now pay this premium (may deduct Medigap supplemental policies, vision, dental, or long term care insurance premiums, and the Part D premium but only to the extent the premium exceeds the Extra Help benchmark amount) (d) Food stamps not counted. You can get a more comprehensive listing of the SSI-related income disregards on the Medicaid income disregards chart. As for all benefit programs based on financial need, it is usually advantageous to be considered a larger household, because the income limit is higher.

The above chart shows that Households of TWO have a higher income limit than households of ONE. The MSP programs use the same rules as Medicaid does for the Disabled, Aged and Blind (DAB) which are borrowed from the SSI program for Medicaid recipients in the “SSI-related category.” Under these rules, a household can be only ONE or TWO. 18 NYCRR 360-4.2.

See DAB Household Size Chart. Married persons can sometimes be ONE or TWO depending on arcane rules, which can force a Medicare beneficiary to be limited to the income limit for ONE person even though his spouse who is under 65 and not disabled has no income, and is supported by the client applying for an MSP. EXAMPLE.

Bob's Social Security is $1300/month. He is age 67 and has Medicare. His wife, Nancy, is age 62 and is not disabled and does not work.

Under the old rule, Bob was not eligible for an MSP because his income was above the Income limit for One, even though it was well under the Couple limit. In 2010, NYS DOH modified its rules so that all married individuals will be considered a household size of TWO. DOH GIS 10 MA 10 Medicare Savings Program Household Size, June 4, 2010.

This rule for household size is an exception to the rule applying SSI budgeting rules to the MSP program. Under these rules, Bob is now eligible for an MSP. When is One Better than Two?.

Of course, there may be couples where the non-applying spouse's income is too high, and disqualifies the applying spouse from an MSP. In such cases, "spousal refusal" may be used SSL 366.3(a). (Link is to NYC HRA form, can be adapted for other counties).

3. The Three Medicare Savings Programs - what are they and how are they different?. 1.

Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB). The QMB program provides the most comprehensive benefits. Available to those with incomes at or below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), the QMB program covers virtually all Medicare cost-sharing obligations.

Part B premiums, Part A premiums, if there are any, and any and all deductibles and co-insurance. QMB coverage is not retroactive. The program’s benefits will begin the month after the month in which your client is found eligible.

** See special rules about cost-sharing for QMBs below - updated with new CMS directive issued January 2012 ** See NYC HRA QMB Recertification form ** Even if you do not have Part A automatically, because you did not have enough wages, you may be able to enroll in the Part A Buy-In Program, in which people eligible for QMB who do not otherwise have Medicare Part A may enroll, with Medicaid paying the Part A premium (Materials by the Medicare Rights Center). 2. Specifiedl Low-Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLMB).

For those with incomes between 100% and 120% FPL, the SLMB program will cover Part B premiums only. SLMB is retroactive, however, providing coverage for three months prior to the month of application, as long as your client was eligible during those months. 3.

Qualified Individual (QI-1). For those with incomes between 120% and 135% FPL, and not receiving Medicaid, the QI-1 program will cover Medicare Part B premiums only. QI-1 is also retroactive, providing coverage for three months prior to the month of application, as long as your client was eligible during those months.

However, QI-1 retroactive coverage can only be provided within the current calendar year. (GIS 07 MA 027) So if you apply in January, you get no retroactive coverage. Q-I-1 recipients would be eligible for Medicaid with a spend-down, but if they want the Part B premium paid, they must choose between enrolling in QI-1 or Medicaid.

They cannot be in both. It is their choice. DOH MRG p.

19. In contrast, one may receive Medicaid and either QMB or SLIMB. 4.

Four Special Benefits of MSPs (in addition to NO ASSET TEST). Benefit 1. Back Door to Medicare Part D "Extra Help" or Low Income Subsidy -- All MSP recipients are automatically enrolled in Extra Help, the subsidy that makes Part D affordable.

They have no Part D deductible or doughnut hole, the premium is subsidized, and they pay very low copayments. Once they are enrolled in Extra Help by virtue of enrollment in an MSP, they retain Extra Help for the entire calendar year, even if they lose MSP eligibility during that year. The "Full" Extra Help subsidy has the same income limit as QI-1 - 135% FPL.

However, many people may be eligible for QI-1 but not Extra Help because QI-1 and the other MSPs have no asset limit. People applying to the Social Security Administration for Extra Help might be rejected for this reason. Recent (2009-10) changes to federal law called "MIPPA" requires the Social Security Administration (SSA) to share eligibility data with NYSDOH on all persons who apply for Extra Help/ the Low Income Subsidy.

Data sent to NYSDOH from SSA will enable NYSDOH to open MSP cases on many clients. The effective date of the MSP application must be the same date as the Extra Help application. Signatures will not be required from clients.

In cases where the SSA data is incomplete, NYSDOH will forward what is collected to the local district for completion of an MSP application. The State implementing procedures are in DOH 2010 ADM-03. Also see CMS "Dear State Medicaid Director" letter dated Feb.

18, 2010 Benefit 2. MSPs Automatically Waive Late Enrollment Penalties for Part B Generally one must enroll in Part B within the strict enrollment periods after turning age 65 or after 24 months of Social Security Disability. An exception is if you or your spouse are still working and insured under an employer sponsored group health plan, or if you have End Stage Renal Disease, and other factors, see this from Medicare Rights Center.

If you fail to enroll within those short periods, you might have to pay higher Part B premiums for life as a Late Enrollment Penalty (LEP). Also, you may only enroll in Part B during the Annual Enrollment Period from January 1 - March 31st each year, with Part B not effective until the following July. Enrollment in an MSP automatically eliminates such penalties...

For life.. Even if one later ceases to be eligible for the MSP. AND enrolling in an MSP will automatically result in becoming enrolled in Part B if you didn't already have it and only had Part A.

See Medicare Rights Center flyer. Benefit 3. No Medicaid Lien on Estate to Recover MSP Benefits Paid Generally speaking, states may place liens on the Estates of deceased Medicaid recipients to recover the cost of Medicaid services that were provided after the recipient reached the age of 55.

Since 2002, states have not been allowed to recover the cost of Medicare premiums paid under MSPs. In 2010, Congress expanded protection for MSP benefits. Beginning on January 1, 2010, states may not place liens on the Estates of Medicaid recipients who died after January 1, 2010 to recover costs for co-insurance paid under the QMB MSP program for services rendered after January 1, 2010.

The federal government made this change in order to eliminate barriers to enrollment in MSPs. See NYS DOH GIS 10-MA-008 - Medicare Savings Program Changes in Estate Recovery The GIS clarifies that a client who receives both QMB and full Medicaid is exempt from estate recovery for these Medicare cost-sharing expenses. Benefit 4.

SNAP (Food Stamp) benefits not reduced despite increased income from MSP - at least temporarily Many people receive both SNAP (Food Stamp) benefits and MSP. Income for purposes of SNAP/Food Stamps is reduced by a deduction for medical expenses, which includes payment of the Part B premium. Since approval for an MSP means that the client no longer pays for the Part B premium, his/her SNAP/Food Stamps income goes up, so their SNAP/Food Stamps go down.

Here are some protections. Do these individuals have to report to their SNAP worker that their out of pocket medical costs have decreased?. And will the household see a reduction in their SNAP benefits, since the decrease in medical expenses will increase their countable income?.

The good news is that MSP households do NOT have to report the decrease in their medical expenses to the SNAP/Food Stamp office until their next SNAP/Food Stamp recertification. Even if they do report the change, or the local district finds out because the same worker is handling both the MSP and SNAP case, there should be no reduction in the household’s benefit until the next recertification. New York’s SNAP policy per administrative directive 02 ADM-07 is to “freeze” the deduction for medical expenses between certification periods.

Increases in medical expenses can be budgeted at the household’s request, but NYS never decreases a household’s medical expense deduction until the next recertification. Most elderly and disabled households have 24-month SNAP certification periods. Eventually, though, the decrease in medical expenses will need to be reported when the household recertifies for SNAP, and the household should expect to see a decrease in their monthly SNAP benefit.

It is really important to stress that the loss in SNAP benefits is NOT dollar for dollar. A $100 decrease in out of pocket medical expenses would translate roughly into a $30 drop in SNAP benefits. See more info on SNAP/Food Stamp benefits by the Empire Justice Center, and on the State OTDA website.

Some clients will be automatically enrolled in an MSP by the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) shortly after attaining eligibility for Medicare. Others need to apply. The 2010 "MIPPA" law introduced some improvements to increase MSP enrollment.

See 3rd bullet below. Also, some people who had Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act before they became eligible for Medicare have special procedures to have their Part B premium paid before they enroll in an MSP. See below.

WHO IS AUTOMATICALLY ENROLLED IN AN MSP. Clients receiving even $1.00 of Supplemental Security Income should be automatically enrolled into a Medicare Savings Program (most often QMB) under New York State’s Medicare Savings Program Buy-in Agreement with the federal government once they become eligible for Medicare. They should receive Medicare Parts A and B.

Clients who are already eligible for Medicare when they apply for Medicaid should be automatically assessed for MSP eligibility when they apply for Medicaid. (NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7 and GIS 05 MA 033). Clients who apply to the Social Security Administration for Extra Help, but are rejected, should be contacted &.

Enrolled into an MSP by the Medicaid program directly under new MIPPA procedures that require data sharing. Strategy TIP. Since the Extra Help filing date will be assigned to the MSP application, it may help the client to apply online for Extra Help with the SSA, even knowing that this application will be rejected because of excess assets or other reason.

SSA processes these requests quickly, and it will be routed to the State for MSP processing. Since MSP applications take a while, at least the filing date will be retroactive. Note.

The above strategy does not work as well for QMB, because the effective date of QMB is the month after the month of application. As a result, the retroactive effective date of Extra Help will be the month after the failed Extra Help application for those with QMB rather than SLMB/QI-1. Applying for MSP Directly with Local Medicaid Program.

Those who do not have Medicaid already must apply for an MSP through their local social services district. (See more in Section D. Below re those who already have Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act before they became eligible for Medicare.

If you are applying for MSP only (not also Medicaid), you can use the simplified MSP application form (theDOH-4328(Rev. 8/2017-- English) (2017 Spanish version not yet available). Either application form can be mailed in -- there is no interview requirement anymore for MSP or Medicaid.

See 10 ADM-04. Applicants will need to submit proof of income, a copy of their Medicare card (front &. Back), and proof of residency/address.

See the application form for other instructions. One who is only eligible for QI-1 because of higher income may ONLY apply for an MSP, not for Medicaid too. One may not receive Medicaid and QI-1 at the same time.

If someone only eligible for QI-1 wants Medicaid, s/he may enroll in and deposit excess income into a pooled Supplemental Needs Trust, to bring her countable income down to the Medicaid level, which also qualifies him or her for SLIMB or QMB instead of QI-1. Advocates in NYC can sign up for a half-day "Deputization Training" conducted by the Medicare Rights Center, at which you'll be trained and authorized to complete an MSP application and to submit it via the Medicare Rights Center, which submits it to HRA without the client having to apply in person. Enrolling in an MSP if you already have Medicaid, but just become eligible for Medicare Those who, prior to becoming enrolled in Medicare, had Medicaid through Affordable Care Act are eligible to have their Part B premiums paid by Medicaid (or the cost reimbursed) during the time it takes for them to transition to a Medicare Savings Program.

In 2018, DOH clarified that reimbursement of the Part B premium will be made regardless of whether the individual is still in a Medicaid managed care (MMC) plan. GIS 18 MA/001 Medicaid Managed Care Transition for Enrollees Gaining Medicare ( PDF) provides, "Due to efforts to transition individuals who gain Medicare eligibility and who require LTSS, individuals may not be disenrolled from MMC upon receipt of Medicare. To facilitate the transition and not disadvantage the recipient, the Medicaid program is approving reimbursement of Part B premiums for enrollees in MMC." The procedure for getting the Part B premium paid is different for those whose Medicaid was administered by the NYS of Health Exchange (Marketplace), as opposed to their local social services district.

The procedure is also different for those who obtain Medicare because they turn 65, as opposed to obtaining Medicare based on disability. Either way, Medicaid recipients who transition onto Medicare should be automatically evaluated for MSP eligibility at their next Medicaid recertification. NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7 Individuals can also affirmatively ask to be enrolled in MSP in between recertification periods.

IF CLIENT HAD MEDICAID ON THE MARKETPLACE (NYS of Health Exchange) before obtaining Medicare. IF they obtain Medicare because they turn age 65, they will receive a letter from their local district asking them to "renew" Medicaid through their local district. See 2014 LCM-02.

Now, their Medicaid income limit will be lower than the MAGI limits ($842/ mo reduced from $1387/month) and they now will have an asset test. For this reason, some individuals may lose full Medicaid eligibility when they begin receiving Medicare. People over age 65 who obtain Medicare do NOT keep "Marketplace Medicaid" for 12 months (continuous eligibility) See GIS 15 MA/022 - Continuous Coverage for MAGI Individuals.

Since MSP has NO ASSET limit. Some individuals may be enrolled in the MSP even if they lose Medicaid, or if they now have a Medicaid spend-down. If a Medicare/Medicaid recipient reports income that exceeds the Medicaid level, districts must evaluate the person’s eligibility for MSP.

08 OHIP/ADM-4 ​If you became eligible for Medicare based on disability and you are UNDER AGE 65, you are entitled to keep MAGI Medicaid for 12 months from the month it was last authorized, even if you now have income normally above the MAGI limit, and even though you now have Medicare. This is called Continuous Eligibility. EXAMPLE.

Sam, age 60, was last authorized for Medicaid on the Marketplace in June 2016. He became enrolled in Medicare based on disability in August 2016, and started receiving Social Security in the same month (he won a hearing approving Social Security disability benefits retroactively, after first being denied disability). Even though his Social Security is too high, he can keep Medicaid for 12 months beginning June 2016.

Sam has to pay for his Part B premium - it is deducted from his Social Security check. He may call the Marketplace and request a refund. This will continue until the end of his 12 months of continues MAGI Medicaid eligibility.

He will be reimbursed regardless of whether he is in a Medicaid managed care plan. See GIS 18 MA/001 Medicaid Managed Care Transition for Enrollees Gaining Medicare (PDF) When that ends, he will renew Medicaid and apply for MSP with his local district. Individuals who are eligible for Medicaid with a spenddown can opt whether or not to receive MSP.

(Medicaid Reference Guide (MRG) p. 19). Obtaining MSP may increase their spenddown.

MIPPA - Outreach by Social Security Administration -- Under MIPPA, the SSA sends a form letter to people who may be eligible for a Medicare Savings Program or Extra Help (Low Income Subsidy - LIS) that they may apply. The letters are. · Beneficiary has Extra Help (LIS), but not MSP · Beneficiary has no Extra Help (LIS) or MSP 6.

Enrolling in MSP for People Age 65+ who do Not have Free Medicare Part A - the "Part A Buy-In Program" Seniors WITHOUT MEDICARE PART A or B -- They may be able to enroll in the Part A Buy-In program, in which people eligible for QMB who are age 65+ who do not otherwise have Medicare Part A may enroll in Part A, with Medicaid paying the Part A premium. See Step-by-Step Guide by the Medicare Rights Center). This guide explains the various steps in "conditionally enrolling" in Part A at the SSA office, which must be done before applying for QMB at the Medicaid office, which will then pay the Part A premium.

See also GIS 04 MA/013. In June, 2018, the SSA revised the POMS manual procedures for the Part A Buy-In to to address inconsistencies and confusion in SSA field offices and help smooth the path for QMB enrollment. The procedures are in the POMS Section HI 00801.140 "Premium-Free Part A Enrollments for Qualified Medicare BenefiIaries." It includes important clarifications, such as.

SSA Field Offices should explain the QMB program and conditional enrollment process if an individual lacks premium-free Part A and appears to meet QMB requirements. SSA field offices can add notes to the “Remarks” section of the application and provide a screen shot to the individual so the individual can provide proof of conditional Part A enrollment when applying for QMB through the state Medicaid program. Beneficiaries are allowed to complete the conditional application even if they owe Medicare premiums.

In Part A Buy-in states like NYS, SSA should process conditional applications on a rolling basis (without regard to enrollment periods), even if the application coincides with the General Enrollment Period. (The General Enrollment Period is from Jan 1 to March 31st every year, in which anyone eligible may enroll in Medicare Part A or Part B to be effective on July 1st). 7.

What happens after the MSP approval - How is Part B premium paid For all three MSP programs, the Medicaid program is now responsible for paying the Part B premiums, even though the MSP enrollee is not necessarily a recipient of Medicaid. The local Medicaid office (DSS/HRA) transmits the MSP approval to the NYS Department of Health – that information gets shared w/ SSA and CMS SSA stops deducting the Part B premiums out of the beneficiary’s Social Security check. SSA also refunds any amounts owed to the recipient.

!. ) CMS “deems” the MSP recipient eligible for Part D Extra Help/ Low Income Subsidy (LIS). ​Can the MSP be retroactive like Medicaid, back to 3 months before the application?.

1) by cheap generic cialis receiving Medicaid. Medicaid recipients, including those who meet a spenddown, are "deemed" into LIS (automatically enrolled by SSA) and don't have to file a separate application for Extra Help. See more below about how receiving Medicaid just for one month can qualify you for Full Extra Help for up to 18 months. 2) by enrolling in a Medicare Savings cheap generic cialis Program.

The Medicare Savings Program includes the Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB) program, which covers beneficiaries up to 100% FPL. Specified Low-Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLIMB), for those between 100-120%. And the Qualified Individual (QI-1) program, for individuals cheap generic cialis between 120-135% FPL. There are no resource tests in New York's Medicare Savings Program.) The New York State Department of Health posts the Medicare Savings Program income guidelines on their website.

Just like Medicaid, Medicare Savings Program recipients are deemed into LIS and don't need to apply through SSA. For more information see cheap generic cialis this article. 3) by applying for Extra Help through the Social Security Administration. The Extra Help income limits are 150% FPL and there is an asset test.

SSA lists the income and resource limits cheap generic cialis for Extra Help on their website, where you can also file an application online and get more information about the program. You can also find out information about Extra Help in many different languages. See Medicare Rights Center chart on Extra Help Income and Asset Limits - updated annually You can apply for Extra Help and MSP at the same time through SSA. SSA will forward your Extra Help application data to the New York State Department of Health, who will use that data to cheap generic cialis assess your eligibility for MSP.

Individuals who apply for LIS through SSA and those who are deemed into LIS should receive written confirmation of their Extra Help status through SSA. Of course, individuals who apply for LIS through SSA and are found ineligible are also entitled to a written notice and have appeal rights. Benefits of Extra Help 1) Assistance with Part D cost-sharing The Extra Help program provides a subsidy which covers most cheap generic cialis (but not all) of beneficiary’s cost sharing obligations. Extra Help beneficiaries do not have to worry about hitting the “donut hole” – the LIS subsidy continues to cover them through the donut hole and into catastrophic coverage.

Full Extra Help. LIS beneficiaries with incomes up to 135% FPL are generally eligible for "full" Extra Help -- meaning they pay no Part D deductible, no charge for monthly premiums up to the benchmark amount, and fixed, relatively low co-pays (between $1.30 and $8.95 for 2020 depending on the person's income level and the tier category of the drug cheap generic cialis. Medicaid beneficiaries in nursing homes, waiver programs, or managed long term care have $0 co-pays). Full Extra Help beneficiaries who hit the catastrophic coverage limit have $0 co-pays.

See current co-pay levels here cheap generic cialis. Partial Extra Help. Beneficiaries between 135%-150% FPL receive "partial" Extra Help, which limits the Part D deductible to $89 (2020 figure - click here for updated chart). Sets sliding cheap generic cialis scale fees for monthly premiums.

And limits co-pays to 15%, until the beneficiary reaches the catastrophic coverage limit, at which point co-pays are limited to a $8.95 maximum (2020 or see current amount here) or 5% of the drug cost, whichever is greater. 2) Facilitated enrollment into a Part D plan Extra Help recipients who aren’t already enrolled in a Part D plan and don’t want to choose one on their own will be automatically enrolled into a benchmark plan by CMS. This facilitated enrollment ensures that Extra Help recipients cheap generic cialis have Part D coverage. However, the downside to facilitated enrollment is that the plan may not be the best “fit” for the beneficiary, if it doesn’t cover all his/her drugs, assesses a higher tier level for covered drugs than other comparable plans, and/or requires the beneficiary to go through administrative hoops like prior authorization, quantity limits and/or step therapy.

Fortunately, Extra Help recipients can always enroll in a new plan … see #3 below. 3) Continuous cheap generic cialis special enrollment period Extra Help recipients have a continuous special enrollment period, meaning that they can switch plans at any time. They are not “locked into” the annual open enrollment period (October 15-December 7). NOTE.

This cheap generic cialis changed in 2019. Starting in 2019, those with Extra Help will no longer have a continuous enrollment period. Instead, Extra Help recipients will be eligible to enroll no more than once per quarter for each of the first three quarters of the year. 4) No cheap generic cialis late enrollment penalty Non LIS beneficiaries generally face a premium penalty (higher monthly premium) if they delayed their enrollment into Part D, meaning that they didn’t enroll when they were initially eligible and didn’t have “creditable coverage.” Extra Help recipients do not have to worry about this problem – the late enrollment penalty provision does not apply to LIS beneficiaries.

1) For “deemed” beneficiaries (Medicaid/Medicare Savings Program recipients). Extra Help status lasts at least until the end of the current calendar year, even if the individual loses their Medicaid or Medicare Savings Program coverage during that year. Individuals who receive Medicaid or a Medicare Savings Program any month between July and December keep their LIS status for the remainder cheap generic cialis of that calendar year and the following year. Getting Medicaid coverage for even just a short period of time (ie, meeting a spenddown for just one month) can help ensure that the individual obtains Extra Help coverage for at least 6 months, and possibly as long as 18 months.

TIP. People with a high spend-down who want to receive Medicaid for just one month in order to get cheap generic cialis Extra Help for 6-18 months can use past medical bills to meet their spend-down for that one month. There are different rules for using past paid medical bills verses past unpaid medical bills. For information see Spend down training materials.

Individuals who are losing their deemed status at the end cheap generic cialis of a calendar year because they are no longer receiving Medicaid or the Medicare Savings Program should be notified in advance by SSA, and given an opportunity to file an Extra Help application through SSA. 2) For “non-deemed” beneficiaries (those who filed their LIS applications through SSA) Non-deemed beneficiaries retain their LIS status until/unless SSA does a redetermination and finds the individual ineligible for Extra Help. There are no reporting requirements per se in the Extra Help program, but beneficiaries must respond to SSA’s redetermination request. What to do if the Part D plan doesn't know cheap generic cialis that someone has Extra Help Sometimes there are lengthy delays between the date that someone is approved for Medicaid or a Medicare Savings Program and when that information is formally conveyed to the Part D plan by CMS.

As a practical matter, this often results in beneficiaries being charged co-pays, premiums and/or deductibles that they can't afford and shouldn't have to pay. To protect LIS beneficiaries, CMS has a "Best Available Evidence" policy which requires plans to accept alternative forms of proof of someone's LIS status and adjust the person's cost-sharing obligation accordingly. LIS cheap generic cialis beneficiaries who are being charged improperly should be sure to contact their plan and provide proof of their LIS status. If the plan still won't recognize their LIS status, the person or their advocate should file a complaint with the CMS regional office.

The federal regulations governing the Low Income Subsidy program can be found at 42 CFR Subpart P (sections 423.771 through 423.800). Also, CMS provides detailed guidance on the LIS cheap generic cialis provisions in chapter 13 of its Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Manual. This article was authored by the Empire Justice Center.Medicare Savings Programs (MSPs) pay for the monthly Medicare Part B premium for low-income Medicare beneficiaries and qualify enrollees for the "Extra Help" subsidy for Part D prescription drugs. There are three separate MSP programs, the Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB) Program, the Specified Low Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLMB) Program and the Qualified Individual (QI) Program, each of which is discussed below.

Those in QMB receive additional cheap generic cialis subsidies for Medicare costs. See 2019 Fact Sheet on MSP in NYS by Medicare Rights Center ENGLISH SPANISH State law. N.Y. Soc.

Serv. L. § 367-a(3)(a), (b), and (d). 2020 Medicare 101 Basics for New York State - 1.5 hour webinar by Eric Hausman, sponsored by NYS Office of the Aging TOPICS COVERED IN THIS ARTICLE 1.

No Asset Limit 1A. Summary Chart of MSP Programs 2. Income Limits &. Rules and Household Size 3.

The Three MSP Programs - What are they and how are they Different?. 4. FOUR Special Benefits of MSP Programs. Back Door to Extra Help with Part D MSPs Automatically Waive Late Enrollment Penalties for Part B - and allow enrollment in Part B year-round outside of the short Annual Enrollment Period No Medicaid Lien on Estate to Recover Payment of Expenses Paid by MSP Food Stamps/SNAP not reduced by Decreased Medical Expenses when Enroll in MSP - at least temporarily 5.

Enrolling in an MSP - Automatic Enrollment &. Applications for People who Have Medicare What is Application Process?. 6. Enrolling in an MSP for People age 65+ who Do Not Qualify for Free Medicare Part A - the "Part A Buy-In Program" 7.

What Happens After MSP Approved - How Part B Premium is Paid 8 Special Rules for QMBs - How Medicare Cost-Sharing Works 1. NO ASSET LIMIT!. Since April 1, 2008, none of the three MSP programs have resource limits in New York -- which means many Medicare beneficiaries who might not qualify for Medicaid because of excess resources can qualify for an MSP. 1.A.

SUMMARY CHART OF MSP BENEFITS QMB SLIMB QI-1 Eligibility ASSET LIMIT NO LIMIT IN NEW YORK STATE INCOME LIMIT (2020) Single Couple Single Couple Single Couple $1,064 $1,437 $1,276 $1,724 $1,436 $1,940 Federal Poverty Level 100% FPL 100 – 120% FPL 120 – 135% FPL Benefits Pays Monthly Part B premium?. YES, and also Part A premium if did not have enough work quarters and meets citizenship requirement. See “Part A Buy-In” YES YES Pays Part A &. B deductibles &.

Co-insurance YES - with limitations NO NO Retroactive to Filing of Application?. Yes - Benefits begin the month after the month of the MSP application. 18 NYCRR §360-7.8(b)(5) Yes – Retroactive to 3rd month before month of application, if eligible in prior months Yes – may be retroactive to 3rd month before month of applica-tion, but only within the current calendar year. (No retro for January application).

See GIS 07 MA 027. Can Enroll in MSP and Medicaid at Same Time?. YES YES NO!. Must choose between QI-1 and Medicaid.

Cannot have both, not even Medicaid with a spend-down. 2. INCOME LIMITS and RULES Each of the three MSP programs has different income eligibility requirements and provides different benefits. The income limits are tied to the Federal Poverty Level (FPL).

2019 FPL levels were released by NYS DOH in GIS 20 MA/02 - 2020 Federal Poverty Levels -- Attachment II and have been posted by Medicaid.gov and the National Council on Aging and are in the chart below. NOTE. There is usually a lag in time of several weeks, or even months, from January 1st of each year until the new FPLs are release, and then before the new MSP income limits are officially implemented. During this lag period, local Medicaid offices should continue to use the previous year's FPLs AND count the person's Social Security benefit amount from the previous year - do NOT factor in the Social Security COLA (cost of living adjustment).

Once the updated guidelines are released, districts will use the new FPLs and go ahead and factor in any COLA. See 2019 Fact Sheet on MSP in NYS by Medicare Rights Center ENGLISH SPANISH Income is determined by the same methodology as is used for determining in eligibility for SSI The rules for counting income for SSI-related (Aged 65+, Blind, or Disabled) Medicaid recipients, borrowed from the SSI program, apply to the MSP program, except for the new rules about counting household size for married couples. N.Y. Soc.

Serv. L. 367-a(3)(c)(2), NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7, 89-ADM-7 p.7. Gross income is counted, although there are certain types of income that are disregarded.

The most common income disregards, also known as deductions, include. (a) The first $20 of your &. Your spouse's monthly income, earned or unearned ($20 per couple max). (b) SSI EARNED INCOME DISREGARDS.

* The first $65 of monthly wages of you and your spouse, * One-half of the remaining monthly wages (after the $65 is deducted). * Other work incentives including PASS plans, impairment related work expenses (IRWEs), blind work expenses, etc. For information on these deductions, see The Medicaid Buy-In for Working People with Disabilities (MBI-WPD) and other guides in this article -- though written for the MBI-WPD, the work incentives apply to all Medicaid programs, including MSP, for people age 65+, disabled or blind. (c) monthly cost of any health insurance premiums but NOT the Part B premium, since Medicaid will now pay this premium (may deduct Medigap supplemental policies, vision, dental, or long term care insurance premiums, and the Part D premium but only to the extent the premium exceeds the Extra Help benchmark amount) (d) Food stamps not counted.

You can get a more comprehensive listing of the SSI-related income disregards on the Medicaid income disregards chart. As for all benefit programs based on financial need, it is usually advantageous to be considered a larger household, because the income limit is higher. The above chart shows that Households of TWO have a higher income limit than households of ONE. The MSP programs use the same rules as Medicaid does for the Disabled, Aged and Blind (DAB) which are borrowed from the SSI program for Medicaid recipients in the “SSI-related category.” Under these rules, a household can be only ONE or TWO.

18 NYCRR 360-4.2. See DAB Household Size Chart. Married persons can sometimes be ONE or TWO depending on arcane rules, which can force a Medicare beneficiary to be limited to the income limit for ONE person even though his spouse who is under 65 and not disabled has no income, and is supported by the client applying for an MSP. EXAMPLE.

Bob's Social Security is $1300/month. He is age 67 and has Medicare. His wife, Nancy, is age 62 and is not disabled and does not work. Under the old rule, Bob was not eligible for an MSP because his income was above the Income limit for One, even though it was well under the Couple limit.

In 2010, NYS DOH modified its rules so that all married individuals will be considered a household size of TWO. DOH GIS 10 MA 10 Medicare Savings Program Household Size, June 4, 2010. This rule for household size is an exception to the rule applying SSI budgeting rules to the MSP program. Under these rules, Bob is now eligible for an MSP.

When is One Better than Two?. Of course, there may be couples where the non-applying spouse's income is too high, and disqualifies the applying spouse from an MSP. In such cases, "spousal refusal" may be used SSL 366.3(a). (Link is to NYC HRA form, can be adapted for other counties).

3. The Three Medicare Savings Programs - what are they and how are they different?. 1. Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB).

The QMB program provides the most comprehensive benefits. Available to those with incomes at or below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), the QMB program covers virtually all Medicare cost-sharing obligations. Part B premiums, Part A premiums, if there are any, and any and all deductibles and co-insurance. QMB coverage is not retroactive.

The program’s benefits will begin the month after the month in which your client is found eligible. ** See special rules about cost-sharing for QMBs below - updated with new CMS directive issued January 2012 ** See NYC HRA QMB Recertification form ** Even if you do not have Part A automatically, because you did not have enough wages, you may be able to enroll in the Part A Buy-In Program, in which people eligible for QMB who do not otherwise have Medicare Part A may enroll, with Medicaid paying the Part A premium (Materials by the Medicare Rights Center). 2. Specifiedl Low-Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLMB).

For those with incomes between 100% and 120% FPL, the SLMB program will cover Part B premiums only. SLMB is retroactive, however, providing coverage for three months prior to the month of application, as long as your client was eligible during those months. 3. Qualified Individual (QI-1).

For those with incomes between 120% and 135% FPL, and not receiving Medicaid, the QI-1 program will cover Medicare Part B premiums only. QI-1 is also retroactive, providing coverage for three months prior to the month of application, as long as your client was eligible during those months. However, QI-1 retroactive coverage can only be provided within the current calendar year. (GIS 07 MA 027) So if you apply in January, you get no retroactive coverage.

Q-I-1 recipients would be eligible for Medicaid with a spend-down, but if they want the Part B premium paid, they must choose between enrolling in QI-1 or Medicaid. They cannot be in both. It is their choice. DOH MRG p.

19. In contrast, one may receive Medicaid and either QMB or SLIMB. 4. Four Special Benefits of MSPs (in addition to NO ASSET TEST).

Benefit 1. Back Door to Medicare Part D "Extra Help" or Low Income Subsidy -- All MSP recipients are automatically enrolled in Extra Help, the subsidy that makes Part D affordable. They have no Part D deductible or doughnut hole, the premium is subsidized, and they pay very low copayments. Once they are enrolled in Extra Help by virtue of enrollment in an MSP, they retain Extra Help for the entire calendar year, even if they lose MSP eligibility during that year.

The "Full" Extra Help subsidy has the same income limit as QI-1 - 135% FPL. However, many people may be eligible for QI-1 but not Extra Help because QI-1 and the other MSPs have no asset limit. People applying to the Social Security Administration for Extra Help might be rejected for this reason. Recent (2009-10) changes to federal law called "MIPPA" requires the Social Security Administration (SSA) to share eligibility data with NYSDOH on all persons who apply for Extra Help/ the Low Income Subsidy.

Data sent to NYSDOH from SSA will enable NYSDOH to open MSP cases on many clients. The effective date of the MSP application must be the same date as the Extra Help application. Signatures will not be required from clients. In cases where the SSA data is incomplete, NYSDOH will forward what is collected to the local district for completion of an MSP application.

The State implementing procedures are in DOH 2010 ADM-03. Also see CMS "Dear State Medicaid Director" letter dated Feb. 18, 2010 Benefit 2. MSPs Automatically Waive Late Enrollment Penalties for Part B Generally one must enroll in Part B within the strict enrollment periods after turning age 65 or after 24 months of Social Security Disability.

An exception is if you or your spouse are still working and insured under an employer sponsored group health plan, or if you have End Stage Renal Disease, and other factors, see this from Medicare Rights Center. If you fail to enroll within those short periods, you might have to pay higher Part B premiums for life as a Late Enrollment Penalty (LEP). Also, you may only enroll in Part B during the Annual Enrollment Period from January 1 - March 31st each year, with Part B not effective until the following July. Enrollment in an MSP automatically eliminates such penalties...

For life.. Even if one later ceases to be eligible for the MSP. AND enrolling in an MSP will automatically result in becoming enrolled in Part B if you didn't already have it and only had Part A. See Medicare Rights Center flyer.

Benefit 3. No Medicaid Lien on Estate to Recover MSP Benefits Paid Generally speaking, states may place liens on the Estates of deceased Medicaid recipients to recover the cost of Medicaid services that were provided after the recipient reached the age of 55. Since 2002, states have not been allowed to recover the cost of Medicare premiums paid under MSPs. In 2010, Congress expanded protection for MSP benefits.

Beginning on January 1, 2010, states may not place liens on the Estates of Medicaid recipients who died after January 1, 2010 to recover costs for co-insurance paid under the QMB MSP program for services rendered after January 1, 2010. The federal government made this change in order to eliminate barriers to enrollment in MSPs. See NYS DOH GIS 10-MA-008 - Medicare Savings Program Changes in Estate Recovery The GIS clarifies that a client who receives both QMB and full Medicaid is exempt from estate recovery for these Medicare cost-sharing expenses. Benefit 4.

SNAP (Food Stamp) benefits not reduced despite increased income from MSP - at least temporarily Many people receive both SNAP (Food Stamp) benefits and MSP. Income for purposes of SNAP/Food Stamps is reduced by a deduction for medical expenses, which includes payment of the Part B premium. Since approval for an MSP means that the client no longer pays for the Part B premium, his/her SNAP/Food Stamps income goes up, so their SNAP/Food Stamps go down. Here are some protections.

Do these individuals have to report to their SNAP worker that their out of pocket medical costs have decreased?. And will the household see a reduction in their SNAP benefits, since the decrease in medical expenses will increase their countable income?. The good news is that MSP households do NOT have to report the decrease in their medical expenses to the SNAP/Food Stamp office until their next SNAP/Food Stamp recertification. Even if they do report the change, or the local district finds out because the same worker is handling both the MSP and SNAP case, there should be no reduction in the household’s benefit until the next recertification.

New York’s SNAP policy per administrative directive 02 ADM-07 is to “freeze” the deduction for medical expenses between certification periods. Increases in medical expenses can be budgeted at the household’s request, but NYS never decreases a household’s medical expense deduction until the next recertification. Most elderly and disabled households have 24-month SNAP certification periods. Eventually, though, the decrease in medical expenses will need to be reported when the household recertifies for SNAP, and the household should expect to see a decrease in their monthly SNAP benefit.

It is really important to stress that the loss in SNAP benefits is NOT dollar for dollar. A $100 decrease in out of pocket medical expenses would translate roughly into a $30 drop in SNAP benefits. See more info on SNAP/Food Stamp benefits by the Empire Justice Center, and on the State OTDA website. Some clients will be automatically enrolled in an MSP by the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) shortly after attaining eligibility for Medicare.

Others need to apply. The 2010 "MIPPA" law introduced some improvements to increase MSP enrollment. See 3rd bullet below. Also, some people who had Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act before they became eligible for Medicare have special procedures to have their Part B premium paid before they enroll in an MSP.

See below. WHO IS AUTOMATICALLY ENROLLED IN AN MSP. Clients receiving even $1.00 of Supplemental Security Income should be automatically enrolled into a Medicare Savings Program (most often QMB) under New York State’s Medicare Savings Program Buy-in Agreement with the federal government once they become eligible for Medicare. They should receive Medicare Parts A and B.

Clients who are already eligible for Medicare when they apply for Medicaid should be automatically assessed for MSP eligibility when they apply for Medicaid. (NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7 and GIS 05 MA 033). Clients who apply to the Social Security Administration for Extra Help, but are rejected, should be contacted &. Enrolled into an MSP by the Medicaid program directly under new MIPPA procedures that require data sharing.

Strategy TIP. Since the Extra Help filing date will be assigned to the MSP application, it may help the client to apply online for Extra Help with the SSA, even knowing that this application will be rejected because of excess assets or other reason. SSA processes these requests quickly, and it will be routed to the State for MSP processing. Since MSP applications take a while, at least the filing date will be retroactive.

Note. The above strategy does not work as well for QMB, because the effective date of QMB is the month after the month of application. As a result, the retroactive effective date of Extra Help will be the month after the failed Extra Help application for those with QMB rather than SLMB/QI-1. Applying for MSP Directly with Local Medicaid Program.

Those who do not have Medicaid already must apply for an MSP through their local social services district. (See more in Section D. Below re those who already have Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act before they became eligible for Medicare. If you are applying for MSP only (not also Medicaid), you can use the simplified MSP application form (theDOH-4328(Rev.

8/2017-- English) (2017 Spanish version not yet available). Either application form can be mailed in -- there is no interview requirement anymore for MSP or Medicaid. See 10 ADM-04. Applicants will need to submit proof of income, a copy of their Medicare card (front &.

Back), and proof of residency/address. See the application form for other instructions. One who is only eligible for QI-1 because of higher income may ONLY apply for an MSP, not for Medicaid too. One may not receive Medicaid and QI-1 at the same time.

If someone only eligible for QI-1 wants Medicaid, s/he may enroll in and deposit excess income into a pooled Supplemental Needs Trust, to bring her countable income down to the Medicaid level, which also qualifies him or her for SLIMB or QMB instead of QI-1. Advocates in NYC can sign up for a half-day "Deputization Training" conducted by the Medicare Rights Center, at which you'll be trained and authorized to complete an MSP application and to submit it via the Medicare Rights Center, which submits it to HRA without the client having to apply in person. Enrolling in an MSP if you already have Medicaid, but just become eligible for Medicare Those who, prior to becoming enrolled in Medicare, had Medicaid through Affordable Care Act are eligible to have their Part B premiums paid by Medicaid (or the cost reimbursed) during the time it takes for them to transition to a Medicare Savings Program. In 2018, DOH clarified that reimbursement of the Part B premium will be made regardless of whether the individual is still in a Medicaid managed care (MMC) plan.

GIS 18 MA/001 Medicaid Managed Care Transition for Enrollees Gaining Medicare ( PDF) provides, "Due to efforts to transition individuals who gain Medicare eligibility and who require LTSS, individuals may not be disenrolled from MMC upon receipt of Medicare. To facilitate the transition and not disadvantage the recipient, the Medicaid program is approving reimbursement of Part B premiums for enrollees in MMC." The procedure for getting the Part B premium paid is different for those whose Medicaid was administered by the NYS of Health Exchange (Marketplace), as opposed to their local social services district. The procedure is also different for those who obtain Medicare because they turn 65, as opposed to obtaining Medicare based on disability. Either way, Medicaid recipients who transition onto Medicare should be automatically evaluated for MSP eligibility at their next Medicaid recertification.

NYS DOH 2000-ADM-7 Individuals can also affirmatively ask to be enrolled in MSP in between recertification periods. IF CLIENT HAD MEDICAID ON THE MARKETPLACE (NYS of Health Exchange) before obtaining Medicare. IF they obtain Medicare because they turn age 65, they will receive a letter from their local district asking them to "renew" Medicaid through their local district. See 2014 LCM-02.

Now, their Medicaid income limit will be lower than the MAGI limits ($842/ mo reduced from $1387/month) and they now will have an asset test. For this reason, some individuals may lose full Medicaid eligibility when they begin receiving Medicare. People over age 65 who obtain Medicare do NOT keep "Marketplace Medicaid" for 12 months (continuous eligibility) See GIS 15 MA/022 - Continuous Coverage for MAGI Individuals. Since MSP has NO ASSET limit.

Some individuals may be enrolled in the MSP even if they lose Medicaid, or if they now have a Medicaid spend-down. If a Medicare/Medicaid recipient reports income that exceeds the Medicaid level, districts must evaluate the person’s eligibility for MSP. 08 OHIP/ADM-4 ​If you became eligible for Medicare based on disability and you are UNDER AGE 65, you are entitled to keep MAGI Medicaid for 12 months from the month it was last authorized, even if you now have income normally above the MAGI limit, and even though you now have Medicare. This is called Continuous Eligibility.

EXAMPLE. Sam, age 60, was last authorized for Medicaid on the Marketplace in June 2016. He became enrolled in Medicare based on disability in August 2016, and started receiving Social Security in the same month (he won a hearing approving Social Security disability benefits retroactively, after first being denied disability). Even though his Social Security is too high, he can keep Medicaid for 12 months beginning June 2016.

Sam has to pay for his Part B premium - it is deducted from his Social Security check. He may call the Marketplace and request a refund. This will continue until the end of his 12 months of continues MAGI Medicaid eligibility. He will be reimbursed regardless of whether he is in a Medicaid managed care plan.

See GIS 18 MA/001 Medicaid Managed Care Transition for Enrollees Gaining Medicare (PDF) When that ends, he will renew Medicaid and apply for MSP with his local district. Individuals who are eligible for Medicaid with a spenddown can opt whether or not to receive MSP. (Medicaid Reference Guide (MRG) p. 19).

Obtaining MSP may increase their spenddown. MIPPA - Outreach by Social Security Administration -- Under MIPPA, the SSA sends a form letter to people who may be eligible for a Medicare Savings Program or Extra Help (Low Income Subsidy - LIS) that they may apply. The letters are. · Beneficiary has Extra Help (LIS), but not MSP · Beneficiary has no Extra Help (LIS) or MSP 6.

Enrolling in MSP for People Age 65+ who do Not have Free Medicare Part A - the "Part A Buy-In Program" Seniors WITHOUT MEDICARE PART A or B -- They may be able to enroll in the Part A Buy-In program, in which people eligible for QMB who are age 65+ who do not otherwise have Medicare Part A may enroll in Part A, with Medicaid paying the Part A premium. See Step-by-Step Guide by the Medicare Rights Center). This guide explains the various steps in "conditionally enrolling" in Part A at the SSA office, which must be done before applying for QMB at the Medicaid office, which will then pay the Part A premium. See also GIS 04 MA/013.

In June, 2018, the SSA revised the POMS manual procedures for the Part A Buy-In to to address inconsistencies and confusion in SSA field offices and help smooth the path for QMB enrollment. The procedures are in the POMS Section HI 00801.140 "Premium-Free Part A Enrollments for Qualified Medicare BenefiIaries." It includes important clarifications, such as. SSA Field Offices should explain the QMB program and conditional enrollment process if an individual lacks premium-free Part A and appears to meet QMB requirements. SSA field offices can add notes to the “Remarks” section of the application and provide a screen shot to the individual so the individual can provide proof of conditional Part A enrollment when applying for QMB through the state Medicaid program.

Beneficiaries are allowed to complete the conditional application even if they owe Medicare premiums. In Part A Buy-in states like NYS, SSA should process conditional applications on a rolling basis (without regard to enrollment periods), even if the application coincides with the General Enrollment Period. (The General Enrollment Period is from Jan 1 to March 31st every year, in which anyone eligible may enroll in Medicare Part A or Part B to be effective on July 1st). 7.

What happens after the MSP approval - How is Part B premium paid For all three MSP programs, the Medicaid program is now responsible for paying the Part B premiums, even though the MSP enrollee is not necessarily a recipient of Medicaid.