WVU Physicians of Charleston

Legal name: West Virginia University Medical Corp Charleston Division DBA WVUPC

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
550779739
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Charleston, WV, US
Phone
3043471206
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$42,008,843
Expenses
$44,890,428
Assets
$14,936,676
Liabilities
$7,907,552

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Linton (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Bryan Richmond (Director): $758,282 total reported compensation
  • Benjamin Dyer (Physician): $749,564 total reported compensation
  • Amy Deipolyi (Physician): $650,524 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

WVU Physicians of Charleston is comprised of faculty from the West Virginia University School of Medicine’s Charleston Campus. The Charleston Campus faculty provide clinical teaching for third and fourth-year medical students, resident physicians and fellows.

What it reported doing in 2023

The Corporation continuously meets its exempt purpose by providing funds to the state-supported West Virginia University School of Medicine. By providing these funds, the Corporation has both lessened the burdens of government and advanced the graduate medical education in West Virginia. As part of its mission to support the School of Medicine, the Corporation incurred expenditures for professional liability premiums on behalf of the faculty physicians of the School of Medicine of approximately $1,086,927 for the year ended December 31, 2023

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 44
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 11.1%; rating input score 11; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $44.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $758K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $28K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.