Clarification Questions – 2022 Ohio Medicaid Managed Care: Monitoring and Evaluation (MCME) Surveys - CLOSED
- Can you provide a breakdown of the MCO Medicaid patient population by geographic area (county, or region)?
Please see these numbers of Medicaid enrollees by Age Group, Managed Care Plan, and County Type.” These estimates will vary for the current Medicaid enrolled statistics, due to the dynamics of the Medicaid program.
Metro Rural, Non-Appalachian Rural, Appalachian Suburban Total for MCO Adult (Ages 19-64) Child (under 19) Adult (Ages 19-64) Child (under 19) Adult (Ages 19-64) Child (under 19) Adult (Ages 19-64) Child (under 19) 157608 125097 30599 31354 30345 22832 26670 20083 444588 456344 439319 61889 61604 124298 104259 86184 83395 1417292 112330 73273 19200 15711 43003 31378 26479 21053 342427 98794 69437 22248 20877 9390 5628 16448 12768 255590 131848 76688 18516 12218 51279 38660 24181 14970 368360 956924 783814 152452 141764 258315 202757 179962 152269 2828257
- How many providers in total participate in the MCOs? Will the target number of completes in this group be stratified?
The estimated number of providers of Medicaid services in Ohio is approximately 88,000 to 90,000 individual providers, all provider classifications and subspecialities – the distribution of Medicaid providers from the MCOs is not available at this time (https://ohio.gov/government/state-agencies/department-of-medicaid).
- Can you confirm the proposal due date? In the RFP it says January 31st, 2022, but the initial Ariba posting page and the OSU GRC web site list January 22, 2022 as the response due date.
The close date for the RFP is now February 7th, 2022.
- The outline of budget tasks includes Task ii, “Survey instrument cognitive testing.” This task requirement is not mentioned elsewhere in the RFP, can OSU provide additional details about what will be required including timing, as the initial project schedule is very aggressive?
Cognitive testing for the MCME is pre-interview evaluation and can include staff review, community member review, or target population review. The format can include one-on-one testing of the instrument, collective feedback from focus groups, or a mix. Usually the goals are to: (1) make sure questions are consistently understood, (2) that respondents have the ability to answer questions, (3) that survey answer options or qualitative protocol options accurately describe, in terms of specificity and intent, what respondents have to say, (4) whether the instrument answers or domains provide valid measures of what the questions were designed to measure, (5) estimates of respondent burden, and (6) timing. Please see Beatty et al., 2019 or Willis, 2015.
- Will the contractor be required to translate any of the survey instruments into Spanish or other languages, and provide data collection resources in those languages?
It is expected that Spanish language options be available for the Medicaid enrolled survey and the Medicaid comparison population survey. The administration of the Spanish language instruments should as “as needed.”
- Can a Medicaid enrollee belong to more than one MCO? Or can an enrollee only see providers in one MCO network?
Medicaid enrollees are predominantly enrolled in only one MCO at a time. Providers may accept Medicaid patients from more than one MCO, so services received may be from a provider or providing firm who has contracts with multiple MCOs.
- Can Medicaid providers who complete the survey receive an incentive payment?
No. The GRC has been instructed to not provide incentives to Medicaid providers.
- In applying the eligibility criteria for the Comparison Population Survey to the 2019 OMAS public use file (except for the rate at which respondents agreed to be recontacted, which is not available), we identified around 4,700 eligible respondents. Given the goal of obtaining 3,600 responses, is a participation rate of 77% reasonable to assume? This assumes that the 2021 OMAS will have a similar sample size for this population, and that every respondent will have agreed to be recontacted. Please advise if these assumptions are far off.
A participation rate of 77% is implausible. Please consider the comparison population sample to be pulled from those reporting a federal poverty level of 400% or below (annual family income).