This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-366R 
entitled 'Medicare Part D Formularies: CMS Conducts Oversight of Mid-
Year Changes; Most Mid-Year Changes Were Enhancements' which was 
released on August 1, 2011. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-11-366R: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

June 30, 2011: 

The Honorable Henry A. Waxman: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Energy and Commerce: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Frank Pallone, Jr. 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Health: 
Committee on Energy and Commerce: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable John D. Dingell: 
House of Representatives: 

Subject: Medicare Part D Formularies: CMS Conducts Oversight of Mid-
Year Changes; Most Mid-Year Changes Were Enhancements: 

The Medicare voluntary outpatient prescription drug insurance program, 
known as Medicare Part D,[Footnote 1] provided prescription drug 
coverage for about 23 million beneficiaries--eligible individuals 65 
years and older and eligible individuals with disabilities--enrolled 
in the program in 2010.[Footnote 2] Under Part D, Medicare 
beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private 
companies, known as sponsors, that contract with the Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
Services (CMS), the agency that administers the Medicare program. 
[Footnote 3] Sponsors may have multiple contracts with CMS to provide 
drug coverage, with each contract offering one or more distinct Part D 
plans.[Footnote 4] Sponsors compete for beneficiary enrollment on the 
basis of plan premiums and benefit designs. Sponsors also vary in the 
content of their formularies--the list of covered drugs and associated 
utilization management (UM) requirements. UM requirements include (1) 
step therapy, which requires that a beneficiary try lower-cost drugs 
before a sponsor will cover a more costly drug; (2) prior 
authorization, which requires a beneficiary to obtain the sponsor's 
approval before a drug is covered for that individual; and (3) 
quantity limits, which restrict the dosage or number of units of a 
drug provided within a certain period of time. Sponsors may design 
their plans to use the same or different formularies. Sponsors may use 
their formulary structures to manage beneficiaries' drug spending and 
utilization, however, sponsors must adhere to a minimum set of 
formulary requirements established in statute and regulation. 

In its administration of Part D, CMS is responsible for implementing 
program requirements and overseeing sponsors' compliance with these 
requirements. To do so, CMS issued regulations and program guidance 
addressing classes of drugs that must be covered on sponsors' plan 
formularies, classes of drugs that may not be covered by Part D, UM 
program requirements, and annual formulary submission time lines. 
[Footnote 5],[Footnote 6] 

Medicare beneficiaries may choose to enroll in plans based, in part, 
on the formularies that sponsors establish for their plans at the 
beginning of each year.[Footnote 7] With few exceptions, once 
beneficiaries enroll in a sponsor's plan, they may not change plans 
until the next year. However, sponsors may make certain changes to 
their plans' formularies during the year, known as mid-year formulary 
changes, provided that their plans' formularies continue to meet 
certain minimum Part D formulary requirements including those that 
apply to mid-year changes. Mid-year formulary changes may enhance Part 
D formularies by adding drugs or removing or loosening UM requirements 
for drugs, or may restrict formularies by removing drugs or tightening 
UM requirements for drugs. 

Mid-year changes affect sponsors' plan formularies and may disrupt 
beneficiaries' access to certain prescription drugs or make them 
responsible for new or unexpected costs. You asked us to review mid- 
year formulary changes in the context of CMS's oversight and the 
potential effect of mid-year changes on beneficiaries. In this report, 
we describe (1) the actions CMS has taken to oversee sponsors' 
compliance with mid-year formulary change requirements; and (2) the 
mid-year formulary changes sponsors made for their plans in 2008 and 
2009 and how many beneficiaries filled a prescription for a drug later 
affected by a negative mid-year formulary change in 2008.[Footnote 8], 
[Footnote 9] 

To determine what actions CMS has taken to oversee sponsors' 
compliance with mid-year formulary change requirements we reviewed 
relevant laws, regulations, and CMS guidance. We also interviewed 
relevant CMS officials and examined previous GAO and HHS Office of 
Inspector General (OIG) reports related to CMS oversight of Medicare 
Part D sponsors. 

To examine the mid-year formulary changes that sponsors made for their 
plans in 2008 and 2009, we obtained formulary files from CMS for 
prescription drug plans (PDP) and Medicare Advantage prescription drug 
(MA-PD) plans for years 2008 and 2009.[Footnote 10] To identify mid- 
year changes we compared the January and December formulary files for 
2008 and 2009 and identified drugs and UM requirements that differed 
at the end of each of the two years.[Footnote 11],[Footnote 12] 

For the purposes of this report, we categorized mid-year formulary 
changes as either enhancements or negative changes. We assigned mid- 
year formulary changes to these categories using a different basis 
than that used by CMS. CMS categorizes negative changes based on 
information sponsors submit when requesting approval to make negative 
formulary changes. However, our analysis indicated that some negative 
changes were implemented differently than requested.[Footnote 13] 
Therefore, we categorized mid-year formulary changes based on the 
plan's actual implementation of the change. In general, our 
"enhancement" and "negative" change categories correspond to CMS's 
"enhancement" and "negative" change categories, respectively. 
Specifically, we categorized two types of changes as enhancements to 
the formulary: 

* when a drug was added to the formulary, which we refer to as "drug 
added"; or: 

* when any existing UM requirement for a drug on the formulary was 
removed or loosened, referred to as "removed UM requirements." 

There were four types of changes that we categorized as negative 
changes: 

* when a drug was removed from the formulary and another drug (known 
as an offset) was added,[Footnote 14] referred to as "removed drug, 
add offset drug;" 

* when a drug was removed from the formulary, referred to as "removed 
drug without offset;" 

* when any UM requirement was added to a drug and an offset drug was 
added, referred to as "tightened UM with offset drug;" and: 

* when any UM requirement was added to a drug, referred to as 
"tightened UM without offset." 

We completed additional analyses to determine the number of 
beneficiaries potentially affected by negative mid-year changes in 
2008. To estimate the number of potentially affected beneficiaries for 
each of these changes, we identified 2008 Prescription Drug Event 
(PDE) claims for beneficiaries who filled a prescription for a drug 
affected by a negative change at any point from the beginning of the 
year up until the approved effective date of the change. To ensure the 
reliability of CMS data we reviewed data documentation; tested data 
elements for missing data, outliers, and errors; and discussed and 
resolved inconsistencies found in data elements with CMS officials 
responsible for data management. Based on these activities, we 
determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. 
(See enclosure I for additional information on how we identified mid- 
year changes and potentially affected beneficiaries.) 

We conducted this performance audit from July 2009 through June 2011 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 
that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Results in Brief: 

CMS monitors--directly examines--certain requests for mid-year 
formulary changes prior to their implementation to ensure that 
formularies meet requirements including mid-year change requirements. 
CMS also conducts retrospective oversight activities of sponsors' 
compliance with mid-year formulary change requirements. Specifically, 
CMS monitors agency data; conducts discussions with trade groups, 
advocates, and other patient representatives; and conducts targeted 
audit activities. 

Our analysis of mid-year formulary changes in 2008 and 2009 indicated 
that sponsors implemented multiple mid-year changes for almost all 
plans in those years. Formulary enhancements, which added a drug to 
the formulary or removed or loosened restrictions on a drug, accounted 
for 87.4 percent of changes in 2008 and 88.6 percent in 2009. Negative 
changes, such as removing a drug from a formulary, accounted for 12.6 
percent of changes in 2008 and 11.4 percent in 2009. In addition, we 
found that in 2008 about 5 percent of beneficiaries (over 1.1 million 
beneficiaries) filled a prescription for a drug that was later 
affected by a negative mid-year change.[Footnote 15] 

In its comments on a draft of this report, CMS generally agreed with 
our findings. CMS asked that we provide additional clarification on 
its oversight of sponsors' negative mid-year change requests and on 
our methodology for our analysis of mid-year changes. We have provided 
these clarifications as appropriate. 

Background: 

Statute, regulation, and CMS policy established requirements for Part 
D formularies including requirements for mid-year changes. 

Medicare Part D Formularies: 

Federal law requires that Medicare Part D formularies be based on 
scientific evidence and standards of practice and be developed and 
reviewed by a Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee.[Footnote 16] 
Formularies must also include drug UM programs including incentives to 
reduce costs when medically appropriate.[Footnote 17] For drugs 
included on their formularies, sponsors may assign drugs to tiers that 
correspond to different levels of cost sharing. For example, sponsors 
may establish separate tiers for brand-name drugs and generic drugs-- 
drugs that are therapeutically equivalent to brand-name drugs but cost 
less. In general, this type of structure encourages the use of less 
costly generic medications by putting them on a cost-sharing tier that 
requires the lowest out-of-pocket costs for beneficiaries. Sponsors 
submit formularies for their plans to CMS through CMS's Health Plan 
Management System (HPMS),[Footnote 18] and CMS reviews and approves 
formularies as part of the annual bid process. 

Mid-Year Formulary Changes: 

Although formularies are reviewed and approved at the beginning of the 
year through the annual bid process, sponsors may make formulary 
enhancements and negative changes at certain times of the year. CMS 
established mid-year formulary change requirements that include 
timeframes in which each type of change can be made, as well as 
requirements for CMS approval and notification of beneficiaries. 
[Footnote 19] Specifically, sponsors may implement changes--that is, 
make changes to their plans' formularies in HPMS--that enhance the 
formulary at any time during the year, and are not required to seek 
CMS approval prior to implementation.[Footnote 20] In contrast, 
sponsors must request and receive CMS approval prior to the 
implementation of most negative changes that could restrict 
beneficiary access to drugs and are not permitted to implement most 
negative changes until 60 days after the beginning of the year. 
[Footnote 21] 

With the exception of certain safety related changes, CMS requires 
sponsors to request negative changes through an application in HPMS 
and CMS officials reported that they monitor these requests. The type 
of approval--implicit or explicit--needed for negative changes is 
dependent upon the sponsor's justification for and categorization of 
the change. CMS generally implicitly approves changes that remove a 
brand name drug with the addition of a generic drug--known as brand to 
generic substitutions--that is, sponsors can assume these types of 
requests are approved if they do not receive disapproval from CMS 
through HPMS within 30 days of submitting the request. However, some 
negative changes such as, in some cases, the removal of a drug without 
the corresponding addition of an offset drug, require explicit pre- 
implementation approval from CMS.[Footnote 22] Also, because of the 
potential for these types of changes to adversely affect 
beneficiaries' access to medications, CMS officials told us that the 
agency approves such changes on the condition that beneficiaries 
currently taking the affected drug are exempt from the change for the 
remainder of the year.[Footnote 23] That is, for the remainder of the 
year the change can only apply to beneficiaries beginning to take that 
drug. CMS officials we spoke with referred to this conditional 
approval as the grandfathering policy.[Footnote 24] 

Regardless of whether the type of change is an enhancement or 
negative, CMS requires sponsors to submit updated formularies--
formularies that contain changes--through HPMS during the first 3 
business days of any given month up until October of the year. 
Sponsors are also required to provide notice of negative formulary 
changes to, among others, beneficiaries currently taking the affected 
drug. However, because it is CMS policy to approve certain types of 
negative changes only when those currently taking the affected drug 
are exempted from the change, notice is not required for those 
beneficiaries.[Footnote 25] In addition, sponsors must make 
information on negative changes available on their plan's Web sites 
[Footnote 26] and are responsible for ensuring that their marketed 
formularies, including those on their Web sites, are consistent with 
their approved formularies in HPMS.[Footnote 27] 

CMS Conducts Prospective Reviews of Formularies and Some Retrospective 
Activities to Oversee Sponsors' Compliance with Mid-Year Formulary 
Change Requirements: 

CMS Prospectively Monitors Mid-Year Formulary Change Submissions to 
Ensure Formularies Meet Requirements: 

CMS officials stated that they monitor--directly examine--certain mid- 
year change requests submitted through HPMS and approve mid-year 
formulary changes that meet formulary requirements including mid-year 
change requirements. Specifically, in 2008 CMS began requiring 
sponsors to request approval for negative changes through the HPMS 
application.[Footnote 28] Officials told us that they review sponsors' 
requests for negative changes in the context of each plan's full 
formulary to ensure that, if implemented, the changes would not result 
in substantial change to the plan's formulary and that the formulary 
would still meet the minimum Part D formulary requirements. For 
example, CMS would confirm that, even with the requested change, the 
sponsor's formulary would include at least two drugs in that drug 
class.[Footnote 29] CMS officials reported that the number of negative 
mid-year change requests decreased by over 30 percent in 2008, when 
CMS made a number of policy changes including requiring that negative 
changes be requested through HPMS.[Footnote 30] 

In addition to monitoring negative change requests, CMS also uses HPMS 
to ensure that certain mid-year formulary requirements are followed 
when sponsors submit requests for negative changes and when sponsors 
upload new plan formularies, that is, formularies that contain mid-
year changes, to HPMS. For example, officials told us that HPMS 
ensures that all required fields are populated when sponsors submit 
requests for negative changes (e.g., required clinical justifications, 
offset drug information, etc.). In addition, HPMS only allows sponsors 
to submit change requests with permissible implementation dates and 
ensures that updated formularies contain only approved negative 
changes or changes that do not require pre-approval. CMS monitors HPMS 
formulary updates throughout the year and can retroactively deny a 
change, specifically a formulary enhancement,[Footnote 31] which does 
not meet formulary requirements, including applicable mid-year change 
requirements. 

CMS's prospective oversight, including monitoring of HPMS, does not 
ensure that sponsors correctly implement approved changes and 
associated mid-year change policies intended to protect beneficiaries' 
access to medications. In order for beneficiaries to benefit from 
these protections, sponsors must administer approved changes 
accurately, such as by modifying their plans' Web sites to reflect 
plans' current formularies. In addition, sponsors must correctly apply 
relevant mid-year change requirements, such as providing sufficient 
notice of negative formulary changes to beneficiaries and ensuring 
that beneficiaries are exempted from changes if they are covered by 
the grandfathering policy. 

CMS Conducts Some Retrospective Oversight Activities of Sponsors' 
Compliance with Mid-Year Formulary Change Requirements: 

CMS conducts some retrospective activities to oversee sponsor 
compliance with certain formulary requirements, including requirements 
specific to mid-year changes. Specifically, CMS officials told us that 
the agency monitors data from its complaint tracking module,[Footnote 
32] appeals data from beneficiaries, and data from a CMS contractor 
(i.e., an independent review entity) to identify areas of 
noncompliance. In addition, CMS has discussions with trade groups, 
advocates, and other beneficiary representatives to determine if 
beneficiaries have been adversely affected by mid-year formulary 
changes which may indicate sponsors' noncompliance with mid-year 
formulary change requirements. CMS officials reported that these 
sources have not identified areas of noncompliance, nor does the 
agency have knowledge of any adversely affected beneficiaries. 
However, CMS officials acknowledged that the lack of complaints does 
not necessarily mean that beneficiaries have not been adversely 
affected. 

CMS also conducts targeted audit activities to assess sponsors' 
compliance with certain formulary requirements, including requirements 
specific to mid-year changes. Specifically, in 2008 and 2009, CMS's 
program audits evaluated sponsors' compliance with mid-year formulary 
change beneficiary notification requirements. In addition, CMS 
completed selected reviews of sponsors' websites for their plans' 
formulary information in 2009 and 2010. In January 2011, CMS was 
preparing to conduct pilot audits to assess the accuracy of plan 
formulary information for a sample of sponsors' websites compared to 
these sponsors' CMS-approved plan formularies in HPMS. These audits 
would therefore determine the extent to which formularies marketed to 
beneficiaries match CMS approved formularies, including the 
appropriate inclusion of any mid-year formulary changes. Although CMS 
officials reported that selected reviews they completed in previous 
years had identified instances when a sponsor's posted formulary 
information for a plan included formulary enhancements that were not 
on the sponsor's approved plan formulary in HPMS, CMS did not view 
these discrepancies as a problem because formulary enhancements do not 
disadvantage beneficiaries. 

Most Mid-Year Formulary Changes Were Enhancements; about 5 Percent of 
Beneficiaries Were Potentially Affected by a Negative Change: 

Sponsors Implemented Multiple Mid-Year Formulary Changes for Almost 
all Plans in 2008 and 2009, the Majority of Which Added Drugs or 
Loosened Restrictions on Utilization: 

Sponsors implemented multiple mid-year changes for essentially all 
plans (see table 1), totaling over 446,000 changes in 2008 and over 
475,000 changes in 2009.[Footnote 33] Specifically, all but four of 
the 4,238 plans in 2008 had one or more mid-year changes and all 4,207 
plans had 5 or more changes in 2009. Forty-seven percent of plans had 
more than 100 changes and a small number had more than 1,000 changes 
in 2008. Sixty percent of plans had more than 100 changes in 2009. 
More plans had a change that enhanced the formulary, such as adding a 
drug to the formulary or removing UM requirements from a drug, than 
had negative changes, such as removing a drug from the formulary. 
[Footnote 34] 

Table 1: Percentage of All Plans With At Least One Mid-Year Formulary 
Change by Type of Change, 2008 and 2009: 

Type of change: Enhancements: 

Type of change: Drug Added; 
2008[A]: 98.5%; 
2009[A]: 100.0%. 

Type of change: Removed UM; 
2008[A]: 96.%2; 
2009[A]: 97.9%. 

Type of change: Negative: 

Type of change: Removed drug, add offset drug; 
2008[A]: 46.4%; 
2009[A]: 40.0%. 

Type of change: Removed drug without offset; 
2008[A]: 16.8%; 
2009[A]: 18.4%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM with offset drug; 
2008[A]: 20.1%; 
2009[A]: 26.5%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM without offset; 
2008[A]: 46.6%; 
2009[A]: 30.2%. 

Type of change: Plans with at least one mid-year change; 
2008[A]: 99.9%; 
2009[A]: 100.0%. 

Type of change: Plans with more than 100 mid-year changes; 
2008[A]: 46.9%; 
2009[A]: 59.6%. 

Source: GAO analysis of CMS formulary data. 

Note: Our analysis included negative mid-year changes for which 
sponsors requested approval through CMS's Health Plan Management 
System (HPMS) and all enhancements. Sponsors are not required to 
obtain such approval to make mid-year formulary changes that remove a 
drug that has been deemed unsafe or withdrawn from the market by the 
FDA or a product manufacturer. The change types include changes to 
utilization management (UM) requirements. 

[A] Our analysis included the 4,238 total stand alone prescription 
drug plans (PDP) and Medicare Advantage prescription drug (MA-PD) 
plans operating as of January 1, 2008 and the 4,207 plans operating as 
of January 1, 2009. To focus on plans available to eligible 
beneficiaries, we excluded plans with restricted enrollment--employer-
sponsored, Demonstration, Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit 
plans--and excluded plans with zero enrollment as of January 1 of each 
year. 

[End of table] 

Formulary enhancements accounted for the majority of total changes in 
both years: 87.4 percent in 2008 and 88.6 percent in 2009 (see figure 
1). Specifically, the addition of a drug to a plan's formulary 
accounted for 56.7 percent of changes in 2008 and 63.5 percent in 
2009. Changes that loosened restrictions on utilization by removing UM 
requirements from drugs on a plan's formulary comprised 30.7 percent 
of changes in 2008 and 25.1 percent of changes in 2009. Negative 
changes accounted for 12.6 percent of changes in 2008 and 11.4 percent 
in 2009. In both years, the most common negative change (7.8 percent 
of mid-year changes in 2008 and 5.9 percent in 2009) was removing a 
drug while adding an offset drug to the formulary, including changes 
such as substituting a brand name drug with a newly approved generic 
drug. Another common negative change was tightening UM requirements to 
a drug without adding an offset drug to the formulary, which accounted 
for 2.8 percent of mid-year changes in 2008 and increased to 3.4 
percent in 2009. (See enclosure II for more information about the 
number of mid-year formulary changes implemented in 2008 and 2009.) 

Figure 1: Distribution of Mid-Year Formulary Changes by Type of 
Change, 2008 and 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 2 pie-charts] 

Mid-Year Formulary Changes 2008: total 446,525: 
Removed drug without offset: 0.4%; 
Tightened UM with offset drug: 1.7%; 
Tightened UM without offset: 2.8%; 
Removed drug, add offset drug: 7.8%; 
[Total negative changes: 12.6%] 
Removed UM: 30.7%; 
Drug added: 56.7%. 

Mid-Year Formulary Changes 2009: total 475,697: 
Removed drug without offset: 0.5%; 
Tightened UM with offset drug: 1.5%; 
Tightened UM without offset: 3.4%; 
Removed drug, add offset drug: 5.9%; 
[Total negative changes: 11.4%] 
Removed UM: 25.1%; 
Drug added: 63.5%. 

Source: GAO analysis of CMS formulary data. 

Note: Our analysis included negative mid-year changes for which 
sponsors requested approval through CMS's Health Plan Management 
System (HPMS) and all enhancements. Sponsors are not required to 
obtain such approval to make mid-year formulary changes that remove a 
drug that has been deemed unsafe or withdrawn from the market by the 
FDA or a product manufacturer. The change types include changes to 
utilization management (UM) requirements. Percentages do not add due 
to rounding. 

[End of figure] 

To focus on plans available to eligible beneficiaries, we excluded 
plans with restricted enrollment--employer-sponsored, Demonstration, 
Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit plans--and excluded plans 
with zero enrollment as of January 1 of each year. 

Mid-year formulary changes implemented in 2008 and 2009 affected a 
majority of Part D drugs, but the percentage of drugs affected by a 
mid-year change to any plan's formulary decreased from 88.2 percent in 
2008 to 70.5 percent in 2009.[Footnote 35] More drugs were affected by 
enhancements than negative changes in both years. For example, the 
number of drugs added to any plan's formulary was 1,335 in 2008 and 
868 in 2009.[Footnote 36] In contrast, the number of drugs affected by 
negative mid-year changes was smaller. For example, 101 drugs in 2008 
and 87 drugs in 2009 were removed from any plan's formulary in 
conjunction with the addition of an offset drug to the formulary. 

About 5 Percent of Beneficiaries (over 1.1 Million) Filled a 
Prescription for a Drug in 2008 Later Affected by a Negative Mid-Year 
Formulary Change: 

In 2008, about 5 percent of beneficiaries (over 1.1 million) filled a 
prescription for a drug later affected by a negative mid-year 
formulary change (see table 2).[Footnote 37] Sixty-eight percent of 
these beneficiaries, more than 755,000 (3.3 percent of all 
beneficiaries), had access to an offset drug, such as a generic, added 
as part of the formulary change that removed their drug from the 
formulary or tightened UM requirements for the drug. There were more 
than 375,000 beneficiaries (1.6 percent of all beneficiaries) who 
filled a prescription for a drug later affected by a mid-year 
formulary change that removed the drug or tightened UM requirements 
for the drug without adding an offset drug to the formulary. At least 
5 percent of the 1.1 million beneficiaries were potentially affected 
by more than one negative mid-year change. However, CMS's 
grandfathering policy is designed so that beneficiaries currently 
taking prescription drugs affected by certain negative mid-year 
formulary changes are ensured continued access to those drugs for the 
remainder of the year. 

Table 2: Percentage of Beneficiaries Potentially Affected by Negative 
Mid-Year Formulary Changes, 2008: 

Type of change: Removed drug, add offset drug; 
2008: Number of beneficiaries: 500,770; 
2008: Percentage of all beneficiaries[A]: 2.2%. 

Type of change: Removed drug without offset; 
2008: Number of beneficiaries: 23,928; 
2008: Percentage of all beneficiaries[A]: 0.1%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM with offset drug; 
2008: Number of beneficiaries: 256,413; 
2008: Percentage of all beneficiaries[A]: 1.1%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM without offset; 
2008: Number of beneficiaries: 352,652; 
2008: Percentage of all beneficiaries[A]: 1.5%. 

Type of change: Total beneficiaries that filled a prescription for at 
least one drug later affected by a negative mid-year change; 
2008: Number of beneficiaries: 1,109,180[B]; 
2008: Percentage of all beneficiaries[A]: 4.9%. 

Source: GAO analysis of CMS formulary and claims data. 

Note: To estimate the number of beneficiaries potentially affected by 
negative mid-year changes, we counted the number of beneficiaries who 
filled a prescription for an affected drug up until the approved 
effective date of each mid-year change. CMS's grandfathering policy is 
designed so that beneficiaries currently taking prescription drugs 
affected by certain negative mid-year formulary changes are ensured 
continued access to those drugs for the remainder of the year. Our 
analysis included negative mid-year changes for which sponsors 
requested approval through CMS's Health Plan Management System (HPMS). 
Sponsors are not required to obtain such approval to make mid-year 
formulary changes that remove a drug that has been deemed unsafe or 
withdrawn from the market by the FDA or a product manufacturer. The 
change types include changes to utilization management (UM) 
requirements. 

[A] As of January 1, 2008, there were 22,823,854 total beneficiaries 
enrolled in a stand alone prescription drug plan (PDP) or Medicare 
Advantage prescription drug (MA-PD) plan that we reviewed. To focus on 
plans available to eligible beneficiaries, we excluded plans with 
restricted enrollment--employer-sponsored, Demonstration, Cost, PACE, 
and religious fraternal benefit plans--and excluded plans with zero 
enrollment as of January 1. 

[B] Some beneficiaries filled a prescription for more than one drug 
affected by a negative mid-year change; that is, were potentially 
affected by more than one change. Therefore the total number of 
beneficiaries that filled a prescription for at least one drug 
affected by a negative mid-year change is less than the sum of 
beneficiaries that filled a prescription for each type of change. 

[End of table] 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

CMS provided written comments on a draft of this report. CMS generally 
agreed with our findings. CMS noted that our characterization of the 
agency's implementation of the Negative Change Request module in 2008 
may be misleading because we did not clearly state that sponsors were 
required to request negative changes prior to 2008. We have modified 
the draft to provide this clarification. In addition, CMS commented 
that we should add additional qualifications to the results of our 
estimate of the number of beneficiaries potentially affected by a 
negative mid-year change. Specifically, CMS stated that our 
methodology for identifying potentially affected beneficiaries could 
have resulted in an overestimate, as some beneficiaries who filled a 
single prescription early in the year may not have been taking the 
drug at the time the formulary change took effect. We agree that our 
methodology estimated the maximum number of beneficiaries that could 
have been potentially affected by a negative mid-year change and added 
language to note this in our methodology. CMS also asked that we take 
additional steps to highlight the agency's policy of approving certain 
negative changes on the condition that beneficiaries currently taking 
the affected drug should be exempt from the change for the remainder 
of the year. We modified the draft by providing additional references 
to this policy. Finally, CMS stated that we should clarify that our 
analysis included a certain type of mid-year formulary change. We 
included all requested negative mid-year changes in our analysis; a 
detailed explanation of our methods is provided in appendix I of the 
report. 

As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce the 
contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 
30 days from the date of this report. At that time, we will send 
copies of this report to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
and other interested parties. In addition, the report will be 
available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report please 
contact me at (202) 512-7114 or kingk@gao.gov. Contact points for our 
Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 
the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions 
to this report are listed in enclosure III. 

Signed by: 

Kathleen M. King: 
Director, Health Care: 

Enclosures - 3: 

[End of section] 

Enclosure I: Scope and Methodology: 

To examine the mid-year formulary changes that Part D sponsors made 
for their plans in 2008 and 2009, we obtained Health Plan Management 
System (HPMS) data files, including formulary files, from the Centers 
for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for Medicare Advantage 
prescription drug (MA-PD) plans and stand-alone prescription drug 
(PDP) plans for years 2008 and 2009.[Footnote 38] To identify mid-year 
changes for each year we compared the beginning of the year and end of 
the year formulary files (January and December, respectively) at the 
drug name level[Footnote 39] and identified drugs and utilization 
management (UM) requirements that differed at the end of each year. 
[Footnote 40] For changes that involved a drug and a corresponding 
offset--a drug added to the formulary to offset the change--we counted 
a change to both drug names as a single change.[Footnote 41] Although 
we have identified all changes implemented as of the end of the year, 
we may not have identified formulary changes that were implemented and 
reversed through the course of the year. 

For the purposes of this report, we categorized mid-year formulary 
changes as either enhancements or negative changes. CMS refers to 
changes that enhance the formulary as "enhancements" and changes that 
restrict the formulary as "negative." CMS further categorizes negative 
changes as maintenance or non-maintenance based on information 
submitted by sponsors when requesting approval to make negative 
formulary changes through the Negative Change Request (NCR) module in 
HPMS.[Footnote 42] Therefore most "negative" mid-year changes have an 
associated NCR submission and we identified negative changes that 
sponsors requested for each year using the NCR file from HPMS. 
However, our analysis indicated that some negative changes were 
implemented differently than requested in the NCR file. Therefore we 
did not categorize implemented negative changes as maintenance or non- 
maintenance. Rather, we categorized types of mid-year formulary 
changes based on the plan's actual implementation of the change. 
[Footnote 43] Specifically, we categorized two types of changes as 
enhancements to the formulary: 

* when a drug was added to the formulary which we referred to as "drug 
added"; or: 

* when any existing UM requirement for a drug on the formulary was 
removed or loosened, referred to as "removed UM requirements." 

There were four types of changes that we categorized as negative 
changes, specifically: 

* when a drug was removed from the formulary and an offset was added, 
referred to as "removed drug, add offset drug"; 

* when a drug was removed from the formulary, referred to as "removed 
drug without offset"; 

* when any UM requirement was added to a drug and an offset drug was 
added, referred to as "tightened UM with offset drug"; and: 

* when any UM requirement was added to a drug, referred to as 
"tightened UM without offset."[Footnote 44] 

Our analysis included implemented negative mid-year changes for which 
sponsors requested approval through CMS's HPMS and all enhancements. 
We reported the number of implemented mid-year changes by type in each 
year. We determined the plans that had mid-year changes using CMS's 
plan information files for 2008 and 2009.[Footnote 45] 

To estimate the number of Part D beneficiaries who filled a 
prescription for a drug later affected by a negative mid-year change, 
we examined 2008 Prescription Drug Event (PDE) data.[Footnote 46] 
Specifically, for each implemented negative mid-year change with 
approval from CMS, we identified PDE claims for beneficiaries who 
filled a prescription for the drug affected by the change at any point 
from the beginning of the year up until the approved effective date of 
the change.[Footnote 47] For the purposes of this report, we used 
beneficiaries who filled a prescription for a drug later affected by a 
mid-year change up until the approved effective date of the change as 
a measure of beneficiaries potentially affected by negative mid-year 
changes. This approach includes all beneficiaries who filled a 
prescription for a drug prior to the mid-year change, some of whom may 
not have continued to require use of the drug at the time the mid-year 
change took effect. To calculate the percentage of the Part D 
population that filled a prescription for a drug affected by a 
negative mid-year change, we divided the number of beneficiaries who 
filled a prescription for a drug affected by these changes by the 
total number of Part D beneficiaries who were enrolled in a Part D 
plan included in our review as of January 1, 2008. We completed these 
analyses by mid-year change type and the number of changes by which a 
beneficiary was potentially affected. 

To assess the reliability of CMS data we reviewed data documentation; 
tested data elements for missing data, outliers, and errors; and 
discussed and resolved inconsistencies found in data elements with CMS 
officials responsible for data management. Based on these activities 
we determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our 
purposes. 

[End of section] 

Enclosure II: Number and Percent of Mid-Year Formulary Changes across 
All Plans, 2008 and 2009: 

Type of change: Enhancements; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 390,092; 
Percentage of category: 100.0%; 
Percentage of all changes: 87.4%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 421,607; 
Percentage of category: 100.0%; 
Percentage of all changes: 88.6%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: 8%. 

Type of change: Drug Added; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 252,975; 
2008[A]: 
Percentage of category: 64.9%; 
Percentage of all changes: 56.7%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 302,103; 
Percentage of category: 71.7%; 
Percentage of all changes: 63.5%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: 19%. 

Type of change: Removed UM; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 137,117; 
Percentage of category: 35.1%; 
Percentage of all changes: 30.7%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 119,504; 
Percentage of category: 28.3%; 
Percentage of all changes: 25.1%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: -13%. 

Type of change: Negative; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 56,433; 
2008[A]: 
Percentage of category: 100.0%; 
Percentage of all changes: 12.6%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 54,090; 
Percentage of category: 100.0%; 
Percentage of all changes: 11.4%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: -4%. 

Type of change: Removed drug, add offset drug; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 34,725; 
Percentage of category: 61.5%; 
Percentage of all changes: 7.8%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 28,277; 
Percentage of category: 52.3%; 
Percentage of all changes: 5.9%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: -19%. 

Type of change: Removed drug without offset; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 1,641; 
Percentage of category: 2.9%; 
Percentage of all changes: 0.4%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 2,578; 
Percentage of category: 4.8%; 
Percentage of all changes: 0.5%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: 57%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM with offset drug; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 7,587; 
Percentage of category: 13.4%; 
Percentage of all changes: 1.7%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 7,141; 
Percentage of category: 13.2%; 
Percentage of all changes: 1.5%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: -6%. 

Type of change: Tightened UM without offset; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 12,480; 
Percentage of category: 22.1%; 
Percentage of all changes: 2.8%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 16,094; 
Percentage of category: 29.8%; 
Percentage of all changes: 3.4%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: 29%. 

Type of change: Total mid-year changes across all plans; 
2008[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 446,525; 
Percentage of all changes: 100.0%; 
2009[A]: 
Number changes[B]: 475,697; 
Percentage of all changes: 100.0%; 
Percentage change 2008 to 2009: 7%. 

Source: GAO analysis of CMS formulary data. 

Note: Our analysis included negative mid-year changes for which 
sponsors requested approval through CMS's Health Plan Management 
System (HPMS) and all enhancements. Sponsors are not required to 
obtain such approval to make mid-year formulary changes that remove a 
drug that has been deemed unsafe or withdrawn from the market by the 
FDA or a product manufacturer. The change types include changes to 
utilization management (UM) requirements. Percentages do not add due 
to rounding. 

[A] To focus on plans available to eligible beneficiaries, we excluded 
plans with restricted enrollment--employer-sponsored, Demonstration, 
Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit plans--and excluded plans 
with zero enrollment as of January 1 of each year. 

[B] We reported the total number of changes sponsors made across all 
plans. To arrive at the total number of changes, we counted the number 
of specific mid-year changes to a drug and multiplied each unique 
change by the number of plans for which the sponsor implemented the 
change. We summed these changes across plans to calculate the total 
number of mid-year changes. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Enclosure III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Kathleen M. King at (202) 512-7114 or kingk@gao.gov: 

Acknowledgments: 

Jennifer Grover, Assistant Director; Rebecca Abela; Alison Binkowski; 
Zhi Boon; Jennel Harvey; Julian Klazkin; Laurie Pachter; and Suzanne 
Worth were key contributors to this report. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] Pub. L. No. 108-173, § 101, 117 Stat. 2066, 2071-2152 (2003) 
(codified, as amended, at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395w-101--1395w-152). 

[2] The number of total Medicare Part D enrollees excludes individuals 
enrolled in plans with restricted enrollment, i.e., employer-
sponsored, Demonstration, Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit 
plans. 

[3] Sponsors offer drug coverage either through stand-alone 
prescription drug plans (PDP), or through Medicare Advantage 
prescription drug (MA-PD) plans for beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare 
Advantage, Medicare's managed care program--Medicare Part C. 

[4] As of February 2009, Part D enrollment was concentrated in plans 
offered by a small number of sponsors. Medicare Payment Advisory 
Commission, A Data Book: Healthcare Spending and the Medicare Program 
(Washington, D.C: June 2009). 

[5] 42 C.F.R. § 423.120(b)(2010); CMS Medicare Prescription Drug 
Benefit Manual (CMS), chapter 6, Part D Drugs and Formulary 
Requirements, §§ 20.1, 30.1.5, 30.2.1, 30.2.8 (2008). The Medicare 
Prescription Drug Benefit Manual consists of multiple chapters related 
to various Part D program areas and outlines Part D requirements and 
CMS guidance. 

[6] Drugs on formularies are grouped into categories and classes that 
treat the same condition or that work in a similar way. Sponsors 
generally must include at least two drugs within each therapeutic 
category and class of covered Part D drugs. Exceptions are allowed, 
for example, when there is only one drug in a particular category or 
class. In addition, CMS requires that formularies include "all or 
substantially all" drugs within six designated categories of clinical 
concern. 42 U.S.C. § 1395w-104(b)(3)(C)(i); 42 C.F.R. § 
423.120(b)(2)(2010); CMS, chapter 6, § 30.2.5 (2008). 

[7] The Part D program year is from January 1 through December 31. In 
June of the preceding year during the annual bid process, sponsors 
must submit separate bids for each plan, including any changes to 
formularies and plan benefit designs, to CMS. Sponsors must receive 
approval from CMS prior to implementing these changes for the next 
year. Beneficiaries may choose a drug plan during the Part D annual 
coordinated election period. Drug coverage under the elected new plan 
is effective on January 1 of the next year. 

[8] CMS's prescription drug event data (PDE) data contain a record of 
each claim reimbursed under the Part D program. PDE data for 2008 were 
the most recent available at the time of our review. 

[9] CMS refers to changes that enhance the formulary as "enhancements" 
and changes that restrict the formulary as "negative." CMS further 
categorizes negative changes as maintenance or non-maintenance 
changes. Maintenance changes include those involving generic 
substitution or modifying a formulary due to new information on a 
drug's safety or effectiveness. Non-maintenance changes include drug 
removals or tightening of UM requirements for reasons other than 
safety or generic substitution. 

[10] To focus on plans available to eligible beneficiaries, we 
excluded plans with restricted enrollment--employer-sponsored, 
Demonstration, Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit plans--and 
excluded plans with zero enrollment as of January 1 of each year. 

[11] Sponsors upload formulary files--containing their approved 
formularies--to CMS's Health Plan Management System (HPMS). Sponsors 
may use the same uploaded formulary file for multiple plans. 

[12] We counted the number of specific mid-year changes to a drug and 
multiplied each unique change by the number of plans for which the 
sponsor implemented the change. We summed these changes across plans 
to calculate the total number of mid-year changes. 

[13] Sponsors are required to request approval from CMS prior to the 
implementation of most negative changes to their plans' formularies. 

[14] Hereafter, we refer to the addition of a drug such as a generic 
to offset a mid-year formulary change as an offset. According to CMS, 
an offset drug can be any FDA-defined therapeutic alternative to the 
drug being affected--for example, a lower-cost generic. 

[15] According to CMS policy, beneficiaries currently taking 
prescription drugs affected by certain negative mid-year formulary 
changes are ensured continued access to those drugs for the remainder 
of the year. 

[16] The Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee must include at least one 
physician and one pharmacist with expertise in the care of elderly or 
disabled persons. 42 U.S.C. § 1395w-104(b)(3)(A), (B)(i). 

[17] 42 U.S.C. § 1395w-104(c)(1)(A). 

[18] HPMS is the electronic information and communication system 
between CMS and sponsors participating in Medicare Parts C and D. HPMS 
collects data for and manages the following plan enrollment processes: 
application process, bid/benefit package submissions, formulary 
submissions, marketing material reviews, plan oversight, complaints 
tracking, survey data, operational data feeds for enrollment and 
payment, and data support for the [hyperlink, http://www.medicare.gov] 
Web site. 

[19] 42 C.F.R. § 423.120 (b)(4), (5), (6); CMS chapter 6, §§ 30.3 - 
30.3.5. 

[20] CMS, chapter 6, § 30.3.3.1. CMS officials told us that they would 
retroactively deny a formulary enhancement that did not meet formulary 
requirements. 

[21] CMS, chapter 6, § 30.3.2. Sponsors are not required to obtain pre-
implementation approval from CMS to make mid-year formulary changes 
that remove a drug that has been deemed unsafe or withdrawn from the 
market by the FDA or a product manufacturer. 42 C.F.R. § 
423.120(b)(5)(iii)(2010); CMS chapter 6, §30.3.3.1(2008). Sponsors 
must submit all change requests before July 31, and must upload new 
formularies containing approved changes to HPMS by October of the year. 

[22] CMS categorizes negative changes into two subgroups, called 
maintenance changes and non-maintenance changes. Maintenance changes 
include those involving generic substitution or modifying a formulary 
due to new information on a drug's safety or effectiveness. Non- 
maintenance changes include drug removals or tightening of UM 
requirements for reasons other than safety or generic substitution. 
CMS's implicit and explicit negative change approval policies are 
associated with the maintenance and non-maintenance change types, 
respectively. 

[23] See CMS chapter 6, §§ 30.3.3.1, 30.3.3.3. According to CMS 
officials, sponsors are responsible for defining which beneficiaries 
they consider "currently taking" the affected drug. For example, a 
sponsor could define beneficiaries "currently taking" an affected drug 
as any beneficiary who filled a prescription for the drug 2, 3, or 4 
months prior to a mid-year change. 

[24] The grandfathering policy applies only to negative formulary 
changes that CMS categorizes as non-maintenance changes; the policy 
does not apply to changes that CMS categorizes as maintenance changes. 

[25] 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395w-104(b)(3)(E); 42 C.F.R. § 423.120(b)(5)(2010); 
CMS chapter 6, § 30.3.4.1. Sponsors must provide written notice at 
least 60 days prior to the date the change becomes effective or 
provide a 60 day supply of the drug and written notice at the time an 
affected beneficiary requests a refill. Sponsors may immediately 
remove drugs deemed unsafe by the FDA or removed from the market by 
the manufacturer, but must provide retrospective notice to 
beneficiaries and others. 42 C.F.R. § 423.120(b)(5)(iii)(2010). CMS 
chapter 6, §§ 30.3.4.1, 30.3.4.3. 

[26] 42 U.S.C. § 1395w-104(a)(3)(B). 

[27] In addition, sponsors must update the formularies maintained on 
their Web sites at least once per month. CMS chapter 3, Medicare 
Marketing Guidelines, §§ 60.5, 60.5.4. 

[28] Prior to 2008, CMS required Part D sponsors to submit change 
requests via a standardized template. 

[29] 42 C.F.R. § 423.120(b)(2)(i). 

[30] CMS officials stated that they also monitor the number of 
negative changes sponsors request for their plans' formularies and 
follow up with sponsors that are outliers in the number of requests 
they submit. 

[31] For example, CMS would retroactively deny the addition of a new 
drug to an incorrect formulary tier; however, CMS officials told us 
that they have never taken such action. 

[32] The complaint tracking module (CTM) is CMS's centralized 
complaint system. Beneficiaries can express dissatisfaction with any 
aspect of the Part D program, other than coverage determinations, by 
filing a complaint with CMS which is logged into CMS's CTM system, or 
by filing a grievance directly with their respective sponsors. We have 
previously reported that while CMS developed a systematic oversight 
process that includes the CTM for tracking and resolving beneficiary 
complaints, CMS oversight of the grievance process was not as robust. 
GAO, Medicare Part D: Complaint Rates Are Declining, but Operational 
and Oversight Challenges Remain, GAO-08-719 (Washington D.C.: June 27, 
2008). Since that report, CMS indicated that the agency has 
implemented additional measures to improve the reliability and 
consistency of its grievance data and is developing plans to target 
audits to monitor sponsors' compliance with grievance requirements. 

[33] We reported the total number of changes sponsors made across all 
plans. To arrive at the total number of changes, we counted the number 
of specific mid-year changes to a drug and multiplied each unique 
change by the number of plans for which the sponsor implemented the 
change. We summed these changes across plans to calculate the total 
number of mid-year changes. 

[34] For the purposes of this report we categorized types of mid-year 
changes based on the plan's actual implementation of the change. Our 
analysis included negative mid-year changes for which sponsors 
requested approval through CMS's HPMS and all enhancements. Sponsors 
are not required to obtain such approval to make mid-year formulary 
changes that remove a drug that has been deemed unsafe or withdrawn 
from the market by the FDA or a product manufacturer. 

[35] There were 2,577 drug names--brand or generic name--in 2008 and 
2,495 in 2009 that appeared on either a January or December formulary 
file. 

[36] To arrive at the number of drugs added to any plan's formulary, 
we counted the number of drug names added to each plan's formulary at 
the end of the year, irrespective of whether or not another plan's 
formulary included these drug names at the beginning of the year. We 
then summed the drug name additions across all plans. 

[37] To estimate the number of beneficiaries potentially affected by 
negative mid-year changes, we counted the number of beneficiaries who 
filled a prescription for an affected drug up until the approved 
effective date of each mid-year change. Our analysis included negative 
mid-year changes for which sponsors requested approval through CMS's 
Health Plan Management System (HPMS). 

[38] To focus on plans available to eligible beneficiaries, we 
excluded plans with restricted enrollment--employer-sponsored, 
Demonstration, Cost, PACE, and religious fraternal benefit plans--and 
excluded plans with zero enrollment as of January 1 of each year. 
Sponsors upload formulary files--containing their approved 
formularies--to CMS's HPMS. Sponsors may use the same uploaded 
formulary file for multiple plans. 

[39] To develop a list of drugs for the 2008 and 2009 formularies we 
started with the reference National Drug Codes (NDC) included on the 
January and December CMS formulary reference files for each year. This 
file includes a set of reference (proxy) NDCs that may be included on 
Part D formularies. CMS began using a reference file in 2007. The 
codes on the reference file represent multiple forms and strengths of 
drugs, but not every manufacturer or package size for a particular 
drug. We generally grouped NDCs to identify changes at the drug name 
level--the brand or the generic names--because that is the level at 
which beneficiaries most likely identify a drug. We merged the 
beginning and end of year formulary files with data from RED BOOK™--a 
drug pricing compendium published by Thomson Reuters--to obtain the 
drug name for each covered drug. 

[40] We reported the total number of changes sponsors made across all 
plans. To arrive at the total number of changes, we counted the number 
of specific mid-year changes to a drug and multiplied each unique 
change by the number of plans for which the sponsor implemented the 
change. We summed these changes across plans to calculate the total 
number of mid-year changes made. 

[41] According to CMS, an offset drug can be any Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA)-defined therapeutic alternative to the drug being 
affected--for example, a generic or multi-source brand name drug. 

[42] Sponsors are required to request approval from CMS through HPMS 
prior to the implementation of negative changes to their plans' 
formularies except for changes that remove a drug that has been deemed 
unsafe or withdrawn from the market by the FDA or a product 
manufacturer. 

[43] In general, our "enhancement" and "negative" change categories 
correspond to CMS's "enhancement" and "negative" change categories 
respectively. 

[44] In addition, less than one percent of mid-year changes in each 
year involved the removal and replacement of a UM requirement to a 
drug on the formulary with another UM requirement; we excluded these 
changes from our analysis. 

[45] To determine the number of drugs added to any plan's formulary, 
we counted the number of drug names added to each plan's formulary at 
the end of the year, irrespective of whether or not another plan's 
formulary included these drug names at the beginning of the year. We 
then summed the drug name additions across all plans. 

[46] CMS's PDE data contain a record of each claim reimbursed under 
the Part D program. PDE data for 2008 were the most recent available 
at the time of our review. 

[47] Our count of beneficiaries who filled a prescription for a drug 
later affected by a negative mid-year change is an estimate, given 
that we used the approved effective date as a proxy for the mid-year 
change implementation date. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: