Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, DAB No. 965 (1988)

DEPARTMENTAL GRANT APPEALS BOARD

Department of Health and Human Services

SUBJECT:  Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare

Docket No. 87-204
Decision No. 965

DATE:  July 11, 1988

DECISION

The Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (State) appealed a
decision by the Health Care Financing Administration (Agency)
disallowing $1,250,136 in federal financial participation (FFP) claimed
by the State for Medicaid administrative expenditures for the period
April 1, 1986 through March 31, 1987.  The disallowance was later
reduced to $1,071,006 by the Agency.  The State agreed that the items of
costs disallowed here are the same in substance as the costs discussed
in Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare, DGAB No. 832 (1987).

That decision involved the difference between the State's claims for
costs at the 75% rate available for operation of a Medicaid Management
Information System (MMIS) and the 50% rate available generally for
administrative costs.  Specifically, the dispute there involved whether
the costs of two divisions of the Bureau of Provider Relations and
certain postage costs were reimbursable as operational costs of an MMIS
at the 75% rate or as Medicaid administrative costs at the 50% rate.

In Pennsylvania, the State conceded the disallowance for 14 job
classifications charged to MMIS.  In addition, the parties agreed to
pursue certain issues on remand.  As for the remaining issues, the Board
sustained the disallowance of the following:

o    The costs of developing and maintaining provider handbooks and of
     writing assistance bulletins (the Division of Provider Education).

o    The costs of responding to provider questions regarding billing
     problems and processing exceptions to the deadline for submitting
     invoices (the Division of Provider Inquiry).

o    All postage costs -- except for reconciliation tapes, which the
     Board determined to be allowable.

The State admitted that this case involved the same legal and factual
issues which were before the Board in Decision No. 832, and the State
agreed to the issuance of a summary decision on the basis of that
decision.  Moreover, the parties agreed that the amount at issue here is
attributable to only those cost items for which the 75% rate is
unavailable in accordance with the earlier Pennsylvania decision.

Therefore, we sustain the disallowance of $1,071,006, based on DGAB
Decision No. 832 (which we incorporate by reference here).


                              _________________________ Judith A.
                              Ballard


                              _________________________ Norval D. (John)
                              Settle


                              _________________________ Cecilia Sparks
                              Ford Presiding Board Member