US · guidance
CMS Pub. 100-16, ch. 7, § 100
MA Coding Adjustment
Because CMS calibrates the CMS-HCC model using FFS data, the relative factors reflect
the FFS pattern of coding. CMS adjusts for the trend in the rate of increase of diagnosis
codes submitted by FFS providers with the application of a normalization factor that is
updated annually and that reduces risk scores with the goal that the average remains 1.0
in each payment year. Because MA coding patterns differ from those in FFS, MA risk
scores increase more quickly and are, therefore, higher than they would be if MA plans
coded in the same manner as FFS providers.
Beginning in 2010, CMS instituted a separate adjustment to the Part C risk scores to
account for differential coding patterns between MA and FFS. The adjustment for 2010
of 3.41% was based on our estimate of how much lower plans’ 2010 risk scores would
have been if the disease scores (the portion of the risk score attributable to diagnostic
coding) for MA enrollees who stayed in an MA plan during the period 2007 to 2010
(“MA stayers”) had grown at the same rate as FFS beneficiaries’ risk scores during this
period. In calculating the adjustment for MA coding differences, CMS removed the
impact of differences in rising risk scores that are attributed to enrollment into and
disenrollment out of MA plans, aging and other demographic changes, and adjusted for
age and sex effects on disease coding changes. For a description of the coding
adjustment for 2011-2013 please see the 2010 Rate Announcement.
History
(Rev. 114, Issued; 06-07-13, Effective: 06- 07-13, Implementation: 06-07-13)
Provenance
- Source
- cms.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-25
- Edition
- iom-2026-08-25
- Content hash
3abbe9e3a634d78230d7bf75596fd99166533d041c6bb8e114aacb74a6dfdf5d
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.