Time To Revive
Legal name: A Time to Revive
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264731843
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Richardson, TX, United States
- Phone
- 2142954277
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,538,882
- Expenses
- $4,173,666
- Assets
- $1,834,473
- Liabilities
- $291,576
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kyle L Martin (CEO)
- Cristin Parker (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Shawn O Carlson (Executive Dir.): $114,223 total reported compensation
- Kyle L Martin (CEO): $112,907 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
On the sixth day of Kyle’s journey, God revealed and provided a plot of land at 4040 Gaston Avenue, where a city revival would spark. With the support of his congregation, Dallas Bible Church, Kyle secured a 6,000 square foot tent. He began meeting with pastors of various denominations, asking them to unify under the common foundation of Jesus Christ. praise and worship 2007 – 40-Day Dallas Revival. sharing the vision Our Mission To live out simple, everyday obedience to the Great Commission and equip believers to do the same.
What it reported doing in 2025
Discipleship training and city-wide outreach activities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $114K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.