C.F.R. » Title 42 » CHAPTER IV—CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER C—MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS › PART 430—GRANTS TO STATES FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS › Subpart B—State Plans

42 C.F.R. § 430.14

Review of State plan material

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

CMS regional staff reviews State plans and plan amendments, discusses any issues with the Medicaid agency, and consults with central office staff on questions regarding application of Federal policy.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 2001–2019 · leading case: State of West Virginia v. Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State of West Virginia v. Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (2007) ca4 “The administrative process for plan amendments gives a state “opportunities to petition for reconsideration, brief its arguments, be heard at a formal hearing, receive reasoned decisions at multiple levels of review, and submit exceptions to those decisions.”
RCJ Medical Services, Inc. v. Bonta´ (2001) calctapp “( 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2000).) The HCFA regional administrator has the authority to approve state plans and plan amendments.”
Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. Betlach (2012) azd “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 . CMS then exercises its delegated authority either to approve the state plan or to disapprove the plan after consulting with the Secretary.”
Ansley v. Banner Health (2019) arizctapp “Contrary to the Hospitals' contention, CMS determines only whether the plan a state submits conforms with the Medicaid Act and related federal regulations; Congress has not granted CMS authority to determine the validity of state law.”
Timm v. Montana Department of Public Health & Human Services (2008) mont · cites it 2× “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2007). ¶ 5 Medicaid benefits are determined in a two-step process.”
Community Health Center v. Wilson-Coker (2002) ca2 “” 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2002). We take care not lightly to disrupt the informed judgments of those who must labor daily in the minefield of often arcane policy, especially given the substantive complexities of the Medicaid statute.”
Asante v. California Department of Health Care Services (2015) cand “” 42 C.F.R. § 430.14 . (3)"The Regional Administrator exercises delegated authority to approve the State plan and plan amendments on the basis of policy statements and precedents previously approved by the Administrator.”
Ansley v. Banner Health (2018) arizctapp “Contrary to the Hospitals' contention, CMS determines only whether the plan a state submits conforms with the Medicaid Act and related federal regulations; Congress has not granted the agency the authority to determine the validity of state law.”
West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources v. Sebelius (2010) wvsd “42 C.F.R. §§ 430.14 , 430.15. 2 . Citations to “AR-" refer to the administrative record filed with the court on November 20, 2009.”
State of WV v. Thompson (2007) ca4 “42 C.F.R. § 430.14 (2005). The administrative process for plan amendments gives a state "opportunities to petition for recon- sideration, brief its arguments, be heard at a formal hearing, receive reasoned decisions at multiple levels of review, and submit exceptions to those…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.