TIARA DEAN, LPC
NPI 1639614019, individual, Morgantown, WV, Counselor, Addiction (Substance Use Disorder)
National provider registry
From the CMS NPPES Registry, refreshed daily.
| Name | TIARA DEAN, LPC (also TIARA WYNN) |
| Type | Individual |
| Status | Active |
| NPI issued | December 21, 2016, last updated February 16, 2026 |
| Practice location | 1005 WHITE WILLOW WAY, Morgantown, WV 26505-6119, 304-513-3495 |
| Specialties | Counselor, Mental Health (101YM0800X, license 2229 WV) Counselor, Addiction (Substance Use Disorder) (101YA0400X, primary) |
Procedures billed
The specific codes behind the dollars. Medicaid figures come from T-MSIS (2018 to 2024) and are compared with every other provider billing the same code; Medicare figures come from the 2024 physician and supplier file and compare this provider's submitted charge with what Medicare allowed, against the usual ratio for that code.
| code | what it is | paid | share | per patient-month | typical | rank among providers | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90832 | Psychotherapy, 30 minutes | $300K | 71% | $125 | $59 (top 5% from $239) | 86th percentile | |
| 90837 | Psychotherapy, 1 hourhistory of abuse | $104K | 25% | $110 | $191 (top 5% from $442) | 16th percentile | |
| 90853 | Group psychotherapyhistory of abuse | $15K | 4% | $28 | $60 (top 5% from $332) | too few months to rank |
In this area
4 providers in Monongalia County, WV carry an indicator in the public record, with $1.2M at stake between them. The most common is more hours than a day holds, on 4 of them.
| tier | provider | at stake | why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | LUCINDA MCCARTNEY Morgantown, WV, ranked 8008 | $255K |
|
| 5 | SANJAY BHARTI Morgantown, WV, ranked 10247 | $530K |
|
| 5 | MICHELLE CARDI Morgantown, WV, ranked 11308 | $358K | |
| 5 | DANIEL FARMER Morgantown, WV, ranked 11788 | $41K |
Recent enforcement in WV
All releasesDepartment of Justice and HHS-OIG releases for this state, newest first. Each opens in a new tab.
Referral packet
The packet is a draft for a reviewer. It reads every public record behind this case, states what the records show with a citation for each finding, names the regulation each finding relates to, and lists the ordinary explanations to rule out first. It never asserts intent.