Free sample · West Virginia Territory Report
8 West Virginia nonprofits named a different auditor on their 2025 filing than in 2024, not counting renamed or combined firms. Finding them yourself means opening the Clearinghouse filing by filing and comparing each with the year before. The Territory Report does that for your whole state. This page is a free sample, built from the same data.
See what the report includes Get the West Virginia report — $299
Data as of 2026-11-06 · Source: Federal Audit Clearinghouse (public data) · West Virginia · 15 of 244 accounts shown
Updated weekly from the Federal Audit ClearinghouseLast pull Nov 15Newest filing in our data Nov 6Next pull Nov 22177 nonprofit single audits accepted Oct 26–Nov 1
In the sample files — built from the 2026-11-06 extract
Live today — as of 2026-11-06
Source: Federal Audit Clearinghouse · Data as of 2026-11-06. Every number is a count of public filings, not an estimate.
How a row is built
The accounts
Built from public FAC records. One organization is named so you can check the data against its own filing; the rest are in the file. Every supported row links to the filing it came from. Open Why this row is here on any row for the observed fact and what it does not mean.
Why these 15 accounts are on the list
| Organization | City | Federal expenditures | Most recently observed auditor | Signal | Pursue? | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEST VIRGINIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HUB, INC | CHARLESTON | $2,731,331 | Perry & Associates CPAs | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | CHARLESTON | $2,476,145 | Brown, Edwards and Company, LLP | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | HUNTINGTON | $14,291,491 | BAKER TILLY US, LLP | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | PITTSBURGH | $1,451,685 | Goff Backa Alfera & Company, LLC | Federal spend growth 2025Why this row is hereObserved: Federal expenditures on the latest filing are at least 1.5 times the prior comparable filing, and the increase is at least $500,000. Figures are nominal, as reported. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: A larger federal program footprint usually means more major programs to audit. Does not mean: It does not mean the current engagement is at risk or that the audit fee has changed. Evidence: The expenditure totals on both filings, with the year each covers. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | MORGANTOWN | $5,022,914 | GRAY, GRIFFITH & MAYS Morgantown, PLLC | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | WESTON | $953,347 | Carolyn L. Gandee, CPA | First single audit 2024Why this row is hereObserved: A Single Audit filing appears for this organization for the first time in the comparison history AuditRadar holds. The latest filing held here is audit year 2024. Why it may merit review: A first single audit usually means new federal funding and new compliance work. Does not mean: “First observed” is not proof that no earlier audit exists outside the available records. Evidence: The filing on app.fac.gov and the audit year it was accepted for. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | ELKINS | $1,396,884 | Perry & Associates | Executive changed (990) 2024 | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | CHARLESTON | $3,609,518 | GRAY, GRIFFITH, & MAYS, A.C. | New significant deficiency 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The latest filing reports a significant deficiency that was not reported in the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is a public, dated change in what the auditor reported about internal control. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization broke a rule, or that it is changing auditor. Evidence: The findings section of both filings on app.fac.gov. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | CHARLESTON | $2,519,810 | BROWN, EDWARDS, AND COMPANY LLP | Federal spend growth 2025Why this row is hereObserved: Federal expenditures on the latest filing are at least 1.5 times the prior comparable filing, and the increase is at least $500,000. Figures are nominal, as reported. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: A larger federal program footprint usually means more major programs to audit. Does not mean: It does not mean the current engagement is at risk or that the audit fee has changed. Evidence: The expenditure totals on both filings, with the year each covers. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | GRANTSVILLE | $4,770,917 | Suttle & Stalnaker, PLLC | New material weakness 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The latest filing reports a material weakness that was not reported in the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: A new material weakness is a change in the control environment the next audit has to address. Does not mean: It does not mean the audit was performed poorly, nor that the organization wants a different auditor. Evidence: The findings section of both filings on app.fac.gov. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | CHARLESTON | $24,171,530 | Deloitte & Touche LLP | First single audit 2025Why this row is hereObserved: A Single Audit filing appears for this organization for the first time in the comparison history AuditRadar holds. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: A first single audit usually means new federal funding and new compliance work. Does not mean: “First observed” is not proof that no earlier audit exists outside the available records. Evidence: The filing on app.fac.gov and the audit year it was accepted for. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | PETERSBURG | $3,925,532 | J. DAVIS CPA AC | First single audit 2024Why this row is hereObserved: A Single Audit filing appears for this organization for the first time in the comparison history AuditRadar holds. The latest filing held here is audit year 2024. Why it may merit review: A first single audit usually means new federal funding and new compliance work. Does not mean: “First observed” is not proof that no earlier audit exists outside the available records. Evidence: The filing on app.fac.gov and the audit year it was accepted for. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | LEWISBURG | $874,752 | EIDE BAILLY LLP | New material weakness 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The latest filing reports a material weakness that was not reported in the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: A new material weakness is a change in the control environment the next audit has to address. Does not mean: It does not mean the audit was performed poorly, nor that the organization wants a different auditor. Evidence: The findings section of both filings on app.fac.gov. Open the filing ↗ | Worth a review | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | OAK HILL | $3,848,642 | Forvis Mazars, LLP | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
| Name in the full report | BURLINGTON | $1,715,970 | Smith Elliott Kearns & Company LLC | Auditor changed 2025Why this row is hereObserved: The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. The latest filing held here is audit year 2025. Why it may merit review: It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. Does not mean: It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. Evidence: Both filings on app.fac.gov, the audit year of each, and the name observed on each. Open the filing ↗ | Strong fit | FAC report |
Rows 2 to 15 are named in the file. Up to 300 ranked accounts — 244 in West Virginia.Unlock every name — $299
What you get
Four files for West Virginia, built when you order, plus a data dictionary that defines every column.
Every ranked West Virginia account on one row: signal, most recently observed auditor, federal expenditures, pursuit label, the auditee contact as filed in the FAC report (title, phone, email) and the evidence link. Sort it, filter it, assign it.
The high-signal accounts as plain CSV, with the auditee contact as filed in each FAC report, so the list goes straight into the system your team already works from.
A printable summary of the territory: the ranking, the signal behind each account and what each signal does not mean.
The same report as a web page, light or dark, that opens in any browser without software.
Every file comes with a data dictionary that defines every column.
Page 1 of the PDF
This is page 1 of 5 of the partner briefing PDF exactly as it prints, from the redacted West Virginia build. The report you buy names every row.
Open all 5 pages (PDF) Get the full West Virginia report — $299
The Thursday email
Built just now from this week's own West Virginia filings by the code that sends it — not a screenshot. It holds 10 accounts this week; 3 of them are printed here in full. Every account carries why it is on the list now, why it fits your practice, the filing it was read from and what to do next.
AuditRadar · Thursday · to you
West Virginia: 10 account(s) to review, 0 verified RFP(s) — week of 2026-11-15
This week's accounts
Built 2026-11-15 from Federal Audit Clearinghouse filings; FAC last synced 2026-11-06. Reports accepted since 2026-11-08 count as new this week. This example is ranked with the default profile; your own email is ranked with your firm’s. One organization may be named on this page; on every other row the name, the FAC report id and the evidence link are left on the server, not hidden in the page. We describe the public record and when it changed — never that an organization intends to change auditor, and never who audits it today.
Sample or report
This page is the top of the ranking. The file is the whole of it.
| This sample | The West Virginia Territory Report |
|---|---|
| 15 accounts, one named | Up to 300 ranked accounts — 244 in West Virginia, every name shown |
| One change signal per row | Seven signals, each with the observed fact and what it does not mean |
| No federal program detail | Federal expenditures and the top federal programs behind each account |
| No incumbent view | The incumbent landscape: which firms are observed on which filings |
| Open RFPs listed by issuer and deadline | The same rows with the source link and the quoted deadline sentence |
| One web page | XLSX + CSV + PDF + HTML, plus a data dictionary defining every column |
| Rebuilt each week | The newest weekly build for 30 days after you pay |
| Free | $299 one-time, 7-day refund after delivery |
Explicit demand
No open request for proposals is listed for West Virginia right now. Each one is checked against the issuer's own page on every crawl, at least weekly, and a solicitation is listed only while its deadline can be quoted from the issuer's own page. When one is published, the report lists it first.
After you pay
Why not search FAC.gov yourself?
| Question | FAC.gov search | AuditRadar |
|---|---|---|
| Shows which nonprofits changed auditor this cycle, ranked? | No — one year at a time, text search on auditor name | Yes — year-over-year diff on every account, with both report IDs |
| Lists open nonprofit audit RFPs, checked against the issuer page? | No — FAC holds completed audits, not solicitations | Yes — deadline quoted from the issuer, re-checked at least weekly |
| What it costs, and who does the diffing | Free — one search at a time; the year-over-year diff is yours to do | A weekly territory plan or a one-time state report; prices on the Pricing page |
FAC.gov behaviour checked 2026-09-15
Reading the file
Each account carries three numbers. Opportunity signal scores what changed on the public record. ICP fit scores how closely the account matches a regional nonprofit audit practice. Confidence says how sure the underlying identification is — a comparison that cannot be made confidently is suppressed, not guessed. The exact rules are on the method page.
| Signal | Observed | Why it may merit review | Does not mean |
|---|---|---|---|
| Auditor changed | The most recently observed Single Audit filing names a different primary auditor than the prior comparable filing. | It is recent, public provider movement in your territory. | It does not mean the organization is currently seeking another auditor or is running a procurement. |
| First single audit | A Single Audit filing appears for this organization for the first time in the comparison history AuditRadar holds. | A first single audit usually means new federal funding and new compliance work. | “First observed” is not proof that no earlier audit exists outside the available records. |
| Federal spend growth | Federal expenditures on the latest filing are at least 1.5 times the prior comparable filing, and the increase is at least $500,000. Figures are nominal, as reported. | A larger federal program footprint usually means more major programs to audit. | It does not mean the current engagement is at risk or that the audit fee has changed. |
| New material weakness | The latest filing reports a material weakness that was not reported in the prior comparable filing. | A new material weakness is a change in the control environment the next audit has to address. | It does not mean the audit was performed poorly, nor that the organization wants a different auditor. |
| New significant deficiency | The latest filing reports a significant deficiency that was not reported in the prior comparable filing. | It is a public, dated change in what the auditor reported about internal control. | It does not mean the organization broke a rule, or that it is changing auditor. |
The same four fields appear on the site, in the report PDF and in the data dictionary; they are read from one file.
Why it is safe to try
West Virginia Territory Report
$299one-time, one state
Get the West Virginia reportSee the live West Virginia previewSecure checkout on Stripe · 7-day refund
We describe the public record and when it changed. We never state that an organization intends to change providers, that an engagement is ending, or who audits an organization today.
