Third Space Revival Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 333571716
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8778295500
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $92,754
- Expenses
- $77,561
- Assets
- $65,182
- Liabilities
- $50,000
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- HEATHER GALLAGHER (BOARD MEMBER)
- APRIL ARCUS FARAGO (BOARD MEMBER)
- TERRY HAROLD BELL (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Third space revival, inc. (the organization) was established to (a) educate the public regarding dance, movement, music and art (b) to promote social welfare and provide relief to the poor, distressed and underprivileged. To promote its mission, the organization shall carry out the following activities: (1) educational and arts events. The organization shall present educational, arts, cultural and charitable events to all members of the public including dances, workshops, martial arts, healing practices, music, teen camps, and other educational and charitable material. (2) acquire facilities for charitable and educational uses. The organization expects to lease and/or purchase one or more commercial properties in or around oakland, California. (3) furnishing facilities 501(c)(3) organizations. (4) furnishing services to 501(c)(3) organizations.
What it reported doing in 2025
The sacramento batterie
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.4%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $99K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 7 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.