The Tide
Legal name: Gospel Tide Broadcasting Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237173366
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Chambersburg, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7172647288
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $742,046
- Expenses
- $773,329
- Assets
- $1,344,966
- Liabilities
- $3,850
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DONALD SHENK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- DONALD SHENK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $88,222 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Tide is an international Christian outreach committed to worldwide evangelism and discipleship; our goal is to lead as many people as possible into a life-transforming relationship with Jesus Christ, primarily through Christian media broadcasts in multiple languages around the world. Rather than broadcasting translations of English programs, The Tide works with partners in Africa, Asia, and Europe and with local ministers to produce radio programs to share the Gospel with their language and in the context of their culture. These local ministry partners are our boots on the ground to provide listener care and coordinate discipleship and leadership training activities. _Since_ 1946 The Tide began as a local radio broadcast in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, known as The Gospel Tide Hour. Founded by Rev. Charlie Byers, pastor of a church in Chambersburg, the initial mission of The...
What it reported doing in 2025
Providing gospel music and spiritual programming to local and overseas listeners
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
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: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 63
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 57.7%; rating input score 58; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.74; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $600K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.